Rove — Things Worse Than Jail?

Everyone is excited that Karl Rove might be named as the Plame leaker. But Time’s story is out, and there’s a problem. From the story:

He [Rove’s lawyer] did say that Rove himself had testified before the grand jury “two or three times” and signed a waiver authorizing reporters to testify about their conversations with him.

Reporters wouldn’t be going to jail to protect a source who has signed a document releasing them from confidentiality. So either it is someone else, or the reporters understand that Rove signed the document as a formality, and worse things than jail will happen to them if they snitch on this White House.

Someone I know left a great comment at Digby’s blog:

There’s a problem undermining the glorious fantasy of the “great unraveling” (of the trail of bread crumbs right up the BushCo hierarchy). These guys obsess about Watergate. For thirty years they’ve been thinking about and practicing (Iran-Contra) how to prevent a repeat of what they see as Nixon’s great failure — not being crooked, but being caught at it. (They’ve incidentally been searching for, and constantly attempting to manufacture, a “Democrat Watergate”, with no success.)
They have demonstrated over and over again, especially recently, that there is only one felony: disloyalty to Bush. And all misdemeanors are punished by promotion or Friday afternoon resignation and Monday morning hiring at forty times the salary just down the street.
So, maybe they have licked Watergate this time — maybe they will ALL JUST NOT TALK. It’s not like the Department of Justice is going to really go after them. And the Washington culture of blatant corporate corruption is so openly tolerated (celebrated!) that who will even notice that today’s “third-rate burglars” are tomorrow’s multimillionaires?

13 thoughts on “Rove — Things Worse Than Jail?

  1. And in other news: three students were gunned-down last week by Chavistah thugs. The “officers” involved “claimed” that they mistook the students for criminals; but there is evidence that the students were part of an anti-Chavez movement, and there is no evidence that the “officers” actually thought the students were committing a crime or were armed.
    In response, Venezualans took to the streets, protesting the murderous tactics of their Dictator, Chavez. The crowd slowly grew to 10,000 spontaneously. In his response, Chavez sent armed military aircraft to hover over the crowd, intimidating them.
    Well, at least he did not have his snipers take out protestors like he once did.
    Kinda puts it into perspective, don’t it Dave.

  2. I cross linked to your post in an excellent diary at MyDD by Bob Brigham, TreasonGate: It’s the Treason, Not the Lying
    Duke Cunningham and Karl Rove in the same weekend! Truly a great weekend for America and for law abiding liberal patriots. Tom DeLay will soon make it a perfect crime family trifecta.
    Happy Fourth of July everybody.

  3. Pericles is the auto-spammer around here, feeding us proper Right-wing propoganda at the beginning of as many threads as possible. I honestly am disturbed at the blatant nature of these efforts. I mean, there’s not even an effort at being on topic, just a random spewing of lies, misinformation, or cherry-picked details. The Chavez stuff has been debunked long ago, yet again and again, over and over, without regard for facts or history, the lies keep repeating. It sends a chill down my spine.

  4. Even if Karl is in any way prosecuted, I expect a Presidential Pardon + retirement for him into some obscure private sector job for a few years. Then he’ll get a revival of respectability reimerge into public life. I’ve noticed that Gingrich, Kissinger, Poindexter, even Rush Limbaugh (before he was mega-popular), and many more Right-wing nutcases have been through the process of pariah, then revisionist history and selective amnesia, then a return to prominence.
    If Karl Rove is to really go down, permanently, it’ll take a lot more than just this. A strong Left-wing media presence and responsible mass media outlets would be very helpful.

  5. I read that comment on Digby’s post earlier, but the ever astute Pericles has me wondering why he doesn’t want us talking about this one.
    What is it about this post that made Pericles so uncomfortable that he had to run right over and try to change the subject?
    Cowardly move there.

  6. A little cold water

    While we’re all giddy (I know I am) over Photoshopped pics and the thought of Rove being drug out of 1600 and thrown into an unmarked Crown Victoria, I think we should prepare for him to be well insulated from this mess.

  7. The reason I brought up Venezuela is to show perspective; I could have brought up Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Cuba, or North Korea. My attempt was to show how good, politically, we have it here. Heck, I could have brought up the Euro hate speech laws which in effect jail people for criticizing muslims.
    Or Putin’s habit of jailing journalists and businesspeople who are not on his side.
    Compared to all that, I’d say the little dark fantasies about Rove are easy to live with.

  8. I love the new right-wing talking point about Venezuala being a dictatorship. Translation – we want their oil.
    Chavez was popularly elected. The US tried to overthrow him and got caught. There was a nother election, and he was agian popularly re-elected.
    Saying he is a “dictator” is just a LIE. An obvious lie.
    Also, I wonder why a self-proclaimed independent libertarian is so concerned with protecting Rove and Bush, and defending Republican Party talking points?

  9. First, I am not pro-Bush/Rove, I am anti-Chavez, as he is the Mugabe of the western hemisphere (or the Hitler if you will).
    Second, Dave you are wrong! MIT and Harvard professors went over the polling data and, based on that, declared the election fraudulent. A Stanford statistician working for the Carter center produced a report disproving the fraud report(this was published in the economist and is why you probably have faith in the stolen election), but the statistician turned around and admitted he was wrong and that the people who produced the fraud report were correct!

    A group of Venezuelan engineers and experts in mathematics rebutted the statement of U.S. statistician Jonathan Taylor, on whose researches The Carter Center based to claim that no fraud was committed in the August 15 revoking referendum on President Hugo Chávez, and Taylor publicly backed down in his web page ( and admitted he was wrong…Rodríguez added that Taylor sent him an e-mail admitting: “I have realized my model was wrong.”
    “Therefore, the figures The Economist quoted (in an article by The Carter Center official Jennifer McCoy claiming that the August 15 recall vote was transparent) are seriously defective.”
    Taylor corrected his model and admitted that the new results “all almost identical to yours

    Knowing these facts no honest, intelligent person could say that Chavez is legit. How ’bout it Dave, are you going to be on the side of honesty and intelligence, or are you going to buy into the leftist propaganda?

  10. MIT and Harvard professors went over the polling data and, based on that, declared the election fraudulent.
    As many statisticians concluded following last year’s presidential election.
    Man, we got it soooo good.

  11. “MIT and Harvard professors went over the polling data and, based on that, declared the election fraudulent.”
    I noticed that line, too. The irony of his writing that made me wonder if he might actually be a left-winger spoofing a right-wing troll parody. Heh.

  12. Why the supreme effort to avoid looking at our own problems?
    Right now I don’t give a whiff about anybody else’s plumbing problem, our own sewer has flooded us to the armpits.

Comments are closed.