Jump to content
ClubAdventist is back!

Rove Reportedly Tells Bush: I Will Be Indicted and


Neil D

Recommended Posts

[:"blue"] Here is what is being said by one of the reporters who is awaiting for the story to break... [/]

By Marc Ash, www.truthout.org

For the past few days, we have endured non-stop attacks on our credibility, and we have fought hard to defend our reputation. In addition, we have worked around the clock to provide additional information to our readership. People want to know more about this, and our job is to keep them informed. We take that responsibility seriously.

Here's what we now know: I spoke personally yesterday with both Rove's spokesman Mark Corallo and Rove's attorney Robert Luskin. Both men categorically denied all key points of our recent reporting on this issue. Both said, "Rove is not a target," "Rove did not inform the White House late last week that he would be indicted," and "Rove has not been indicted." Further, both Corallo and Luskin denied Leopold's account of events at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm that represents Karl Rove. They specifically stated again that no such meeting ever occurred, that Fitzgerald was not there, that Rove was not there, and that a major meeting did not take place. Both men were unequivocal on that point.

We can now report, however, that we have additional, independent sources that refute those denials by Corallo and Luskin. While we had only our own sources to work with in the beginning, additional sources have now come forward and offered corroboration to us.

We have been contacted by at least three reporters from mainstream media - network level organizations - who shared with us off-the-record confirmation and moral support. When we asked why they were not going public with this information, in each case they expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it.

We also learned the following: The events at the office building that houses the law firm of Patton Boggs were not in fact a very well-guarded secret. Despite denials by Corallo and Luskin, there was intense activity at the office building. In fact, the building was staked out by at least two major network news crews. Further, although Corallo and Luskin are not prepared to talk about what happened in the offices of Patton Boggs, others emerging from the building were, both on background and off-the-record. There were a lot of talkers, and they confirmed our accounts. We do have more information, but want additional confirmation before going public with it.

THE 24 HOUR THING

We reported that Patrick Fitzgerald had, "instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order...." That does not mean that at the end of that 24-hour period, Fitzgerald is obliged to hold a press conference and make an announcement. It just means that he has given Rove a 24-hour formal notification. Fitzgerald is not obliged to make an announcement at any point; he does so at his own discretion, and not if it compromises his case. So we're all stuck waiting here. Grab some coffee.

Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.

 

George Bernard Shaw

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like the same mistake Matt Drudge did. His source for the Kerry-intern affair was a reporter for Time Magazine that said Time was sitting on the story. It turned out the reason Time was sitting on the story was so they could verify all the facts... which turned out to be false. Drudge ran with the story and ended up with egg on his face.

Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com

Author of  Peculiar Christianity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is always a mistake to run with what one believes to be the facts when in fact one does not have all the facts yet. It will not be the first time that reporters have had egg on their face due to a premature story. I believe a CBS reporter Dan Rather got into trouble for doing just that some time ago.

riverside.gif Riverside CA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

OK, at this stage I apologise for suggesting that a Rove indictment was as close as this week. Note that I didn't accept Jason Leopold's story that Rove had already been indicted last Friday. I thought maybe an indictment would come this week, and it didn't, so I was wrong on that score. One may come later, or he may never be indicated for his role in this affair. I guess we're all still in the position of having to wait and see... better work harder on building that time machine.

Truth is important

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×
×
  • Create New...