TIME Magazine:
By on Nov 6th, 2005 at 10:11 am
TIME Magazine:
“[S]everal of the most important lawyers who deal with special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said they saw more clues last week that Fitzgerald is continuing to look into the possibility of charging Rove with lying to investigators or the grand jury or both.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
So much for Rove being in the clear. Don’t hear too much of that this week…
November 6th, 2005 at 10:24 amPersonally, I really don’t care if Scooter and Rove ever do jail time. If Bush has the gall to issue pardons that’s ok with me. What I want is for the mush-headed swing voter to finally get a scintilla of a clue what a totally corrupt and incompetent disaster this administration has turned out to be. That, and for it to sink into the MSM “common wisdom” what the truth is.
November 6th, 2005 at 10:33 amWe need to issue Fitz a “charge” card with no credit limit. Titanium, baby!
November 6th, 2005 at 10:37 amUnfortunately you do not hear much of this from the media because it is controlled by the right wing. These douchebag reporters are given talking points from the big bosses, who support big business and big money. The reason the republican party has gotten away with all their crimes and lies (so far), is because the mainstream media is suppressing the information. We need to start writing and picketing the tv and newspaper offices until they come clean. The majority of the people who live in the US want the truth, no matter how much it may hurt.
November 6th, 2005 at 10:39 am#4
You are correct. The problem is the media, IN THE US. All you have to do is turn on BBC News and you will see the truth being told there. But how do you get the average person to watch news that they would consider to be “from another country?”
WHat this ammounts to is a cover-up by the MSM. The CEOs of these “news” organizations need to be tried under obstruction of justice. They are keeping this country from knowing the truth and are just a guilty as Bush adn friends.
November 6th, 2005 at 11:03 amI agree with Alan.
November 6th, 2005 at 11:09 amEarly on the sentiment went so far as to suggest the lack of indictment was actually a BAD thing for the WH. I think we’re seeing that now. There aint enough caulk for all the crap squeezing out now…
#6
Nice image. :)
November 6th, 2005 at 11:17 amI sure hope there is something to this story
I was initially dissapointed with Fitzgerald, for allowing someone to fall into a bucket of Bush and come out smelling like a Rove.
November 6th, 2005 at 11:18 amGeorge Allan (paraphrase):
1. The shutdown of the senate was partisan.
2. There were problems with intelligence.
3. Intelligence problems are above partisanship.
4. We need to do something about intelligence problems for future generations
5. The shutdown of the senate was partisan.
The hairspray has soaked well into brain tissue.
November 6th, 2005 at 11:26 amGeorge W. Bush has said that Karl Rove is still under investigation. Repeat that 5 times oh ye in wingerville.
Rove has not “been cleared” by Fitszgerald, he is still under investigation. Fitzgerald is investigating the fact the a CIA agents “cover was blown”, in his words.
George W. Bush said he would not take refuge in the vagueness of Lawyer speak, but he and his moonpie faced spokeswoman, Scott McLellan keep saying that they “can’t respond because there is an investigation” going on. SO, instead of being the “resolute” and “honest” politician and saying to his staff: “DID ANY OF YOU(MY STAFF) TALK ABOUT VALERIE WILSON TO REPORTERS? Geeoge W. Bush, “Mr. Honest and Resolute” hides beind the perfectly lawyerly and as they would say “Clintonian” phrase: “I can’t talk because the lawyers say so.
Bush is a dissipated and uncurious son of a former President, Vice President, CIA Director and grandson of a fomer “Yankee” Senator, who was also a grave robber. In other words, a dynasty boy.
Now after pushing the whole honest and decency canard for so long, now the Bush folks have gotten shiftier than an indicted mob boss.
Freaking pathetic.
-GSD
November 6th, 2005 at 11:34 amritzy #4,
You are spot on. The media that democracy is built upon has been compromised and the results have been nothing short of murder. The murder of our democracy and the murder of 2,000+ American servicemen and countless innocent Iraqi people. The megacorporate media in this country (that fall under the Viacom, Newscorp, Disney, GE et al. umbrella) are certainly complicit in what has happened and though they will never be held accountable in a court of law, we all know that they are culpable. The court of public opinion should put them away for their crimes.
November 6th, 2005 at 12:04 pmOK,
So besides the BBC, and media matters, where does one go for the truth? Does CNN fall under the controlled media? What about Time Magazine?
November 6th, 2005 at 3:11 pmI’m so frustrated.
True Blue, I find The Economist magazine informative. Opednews.com is something I bookmarked recently. Buzzflash.com will give you a liberal slant. When you read various columnists, you’ll notice that over time they will direct you to news sources they look at. Many times those sources will be internationally based such as in Israel or Hong Kong. After you’ve read them for awhile you’ll compare their views to US media and realize how incredibly lazy and narrow-scoped our journalists (teleprompter readers) are.
November 6th, 2005 at 6:16 pm“BRING IT ON FITZ!”
I agree with everybody who says the MSM is part of a cover up. I agree that BBC can be trusted.
And yes, I’ve heard Scotty use the “no comment as there is an ongoing investigation”. Meaning Rove and many others are still being investigated.
For you pugs who say this is partisan, I guess your saying Scotty is partisan too, or he’s just a liar…you decide.
November 6th, 2005 at 6:47 pmTrue Blue, one of the more eye-opening letters to the editor in the NY Times several months ago said that the letter writer finds himself reading the op-ed page to find out what’s really going on, because the front page does such a poor job. The writer was specifically referring to many of the same columnists I like — Tom Friedman, Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, Bob Herbert, Nick Kristoff and Frank Rich. The problem now is that, unless you subscribe to the NY Times, you have to pay like $50 year to read the paper’s columnists online. I also like E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post, who was one of Clinton’s favorites.
November 6th, 2005 at 6:49 pm#15, Anyone of us could have been the writer of that letter to the Times. And like you, I always read the same columnists to fill in the blanks of the front pages, but now I can’t do that any more. I find that extremely irritating and high-handed by the NYT especially in light of the opinion of the news and that paper’s troubles these days.
November 6th, 2005 at 6:54 pmThe New York Times wants money to read their rag?
Now that is definately the joke of the week.
Anyone notice how the Times is now covering the Bushie lies? Sorry NYT, too little too late, you hire liars and support liars.
In my opinion, the Times should be charged with conspiracy.
November 6th, 2005 at 8:19 pmSusan, you’re supporting my point. Readers are turning away from the front page because the paper isn’t doing its job. Instead, readers — in a real twist — turn to the op-ed page to get critical, yet informed and constructive news. If you call the NYT a rag, I can only assume you mean the entire paper, including the arts, sports, science, travel, health, magazine and style sections as well.
November 6th, 2005 at 8:44 pmI call it a rag because it was the Times that pushed Bushie’s false war claims. They also employ Judith Miller who is a criminal.
November 6th, 2005 at 9:26 pmThe problem with the NYT and many papers these days is that you can’t distinguish the front page from the op-ed pages. It used to be that stories were chosen and written based on their newsworthiness not on some agenda. Maybe if they went back to actually reporting the news instead of trying to create it, they would sell more papers.
November 7th, 2005 at 9:20 am