Oh when the frogs,
Oh when the frogs,
Oh when the frogs come marching in,
The Big Question: Will Dubya oust Rove from the WH or will some tortured logic be deployed to justify him remaining on the job pending the final outcome of a trial? I say firing Rove would be like locking the liquor cabinet, a panic inducing act, delirium tremors and blackouts to follow. Cheney's right hand man may have been dispensable but Bush won't part with his balls. If Fitz drops the hammer my money's on Bush saying "Fuck you!". Takers?
Posted by steve duncan at May 15, 2006 08:18 AMSteve,
I published Jason Leopold's piece from Truthout on my blog over the weekend.
He's claiming the idictment was handed down Friday and he (Fitz) gave Rove the weekend to get his affiars in order (whatever that means.)
It's quiet -- too quiet today. Like something's coming, and it's gonna' be great!
Posted by Christopher at May 15, 2006 08:31 AMOh, I forgot!
Did anyone see the CNN website Sunday that said Bush's schedule for this week had been withdrawn?
The MSM was sent scrambling to determine where to send their reporters.
Very odd.
Posted by Christopher at May 15, 2006 08:33 AMAt this point, Rove is really working for the RNC anyway. I'm very glad he will be indicted, but he'll just move his office down the street and have Mehlman or some other Capital & Crucifix Party operative convey the political moves to Nero et. al. No real change.
Knowing Nero and his debilitating personal insecurities and monstrous ego, it's probably a real love/hate relationship with KKKarl at best. Nero can be talked through this crisis, and the RNC ain't going to lose Rove's evil manipulations of the citizenry.
But some justice may still operate, and that would be deeply satisfying.
Two current WH staffers indicted!! That's historic, unprecedented corruption and criminality!
The shitbrain Right calls this the "criminalization of politics". An accurate phrase for Bushco would be the "politicization of crime".
It mentioned that Rove would resign.
But everyone is right, he will still be pulling the strings at the RNC and the master manipulator will be ever present for the upcoming fall elections! Beware!!
Could bu$h get even more incoherent without Turdblossom?
Posted by Seven of Six at May 15, 2006 08:45 AMSeven of Six,
Little Boots will pardon him. He adores his Turd Blossom and will protect him till the end.
Posted by Christopher at May 15, 2006 09:28 AMThe strategy is simple, the solution glaring:
MAKE KARL ROVE THE FACE OF THE GOP.
Posted by God Of War at May 15, 2006 09:31 AMMAKE KARL ROVE THE FACE OF THE GOP.
Make Karl Rove the Dartboard of the GOP!!
Posted by Seven of Six at May 15, 2006 09:41 AMGOW, the Dems have all they need to craft a Culture of Corruption campaign against the GOP. More than they can use - they can cherry pick the worst examples and even then it would be a huge list of corrupt practices, many of which cost GI lives. IF Rove is indicted, and you have the #1 guys to both Bush and Cheney going up the river- common sense tells you that defeating these guys in November would be a Slam Dunk. But I"ve heard that descriptor somewhere else, a few years back. Unless Shaq is running on a Dem platform, I wouldn't count on any Slam Dunks against these crooks. Their stakes are higher than most people can imagine.
Posted by T2 at May 15, 2006 09:42 AMLittle Boots will pardon him. He adores his Turd Blossom and will protect him till the end.
If they drag this thing out as they've been doing, Karl and Scooter may not even go to trial while GWB is still in office. Can he pardon them if they've been indicted, but not yet convicted?
Posted by ann at May 15, 2006 09:52 AMah....answered my own question:
A presidential pardon may be granted at any time after commission of the offense; the pardoned person need not have been convicted or even formally charged with a crime.
Thanks, wiki. Of course, now I'm really bummed. The only way GWB doesn't get to hand out pardons is if he's impeached.
Posted by ann at May 15, 2006 09:56 AMHell hath no fury ... if indeed the reports from ABC that they've been informed that ABC, WaPost and NYT are having their phone #'s collected, the tide may certainly turn in their approach to reporting. I'm sure Tony Snow is going to have a fine week.
Posted by mainsailset at May 15, 2006 10:01 AMann, he can pardon even if impeached. Clinton was impeached and still performed all his presidential duties.
Posted by steve duncan at May 15, 2006 10:07 AMClinton was impeached and still performed all his presidential duties.
But Clinton was acquitted by the Senate. I believe that's why he could still grant pardons.
Posted by ann at May 15, 2006 10:25 AMMainsail, that's what's so frustrating---NSA has the records of EVERY telephone contact that the press has with its sources within the government. And obvious reason to use them, given Nero's "leaks destroy national security" rationale.
The press has been fatally compromised by the NSA program; no source will come forward ever again. And they still don't care! They don't even make the argument, or appeal to Dems to do it.
A country without an effective free press is by definition an authoritarian state.
Posted by euzoius at May 15, 2006 10:30 AMOh, if we only had 50 + one vote.
1. Q: How long would it take to eject a vice president from office by impeachment?
A: Theoretically it could be done in a day. In the morning a member of the House of Representatives could propose one or more Articles of Impeachment and then a vote could be called. A simple majority (50% plus one vote) is all that is needed to impeach. In the afternoon the Senate could try the case. A two-thirds vote is needed in the Senate to convict.
2. Q: Why is it so simple?
A: Because ejecting a person from high office is political, not judicial. The only punishment to be meted out is removal from office.
3. Q: What is an impeachable offense?
A: An impeachable offense can be as nebulous as “He practices cronyism.” We can call this a misdemeanor. According to the Constitution, Article II, Section 4, “The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” President Gerald Ford was correct when he said in 1970 that, “An impeachable offense is whatever the majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at any given moment in its history.”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAX20051105&articleId=1185
Posted by Judith at May 15, 2006 10:31 AMThis will make you sick:
12. Q: Could the president offer a pardon to thwart the process of impeachment?
A: No. The Constitution puts only one restriction on the president’s power to pardon, namely it cannot be used in cases of impeachment.
13. Q: Does this mean that if by any chance Mr. Cheney has committed a crime he can never enjoy a pardon?
A: No, it does not mean that. President Bush, or a later president, could pardon Mr. Cheney. The president is prevented only from interfering in the process of impeachment.
14. Q: Could Mr. Cheney seek a presidential pardon right now?
A: Yes. Indeed, for all we know, the current president may be holding a batch of signed (and witnessed) pardons in his desk at this very moment.
15. Q: Are you suggesting that President Bush could pardon a person’s crime in advance of the person being convicted of any crime?
A: Yes. The elder President Bush (president from 1989 to 1993) issued a pardon a few weeks before he left office, for Caspar Weinberger, who at that point had not been convicted of anything. Quite possibly his motive was to avoid being subpoenaed as a witness at Weinberger’s trial. As a witness, Bush could be cross-examined and his own dealings in the Iran-Contra affair could have been revealed.
Posted by Judith at May 15, 2006 10:37 AMIt's a shame that people nature lack's patience. The lead that was broken of the internet is just that, a lead. One must give time for things to materialize. As much as people are out for his head, Karl Rove is still a very powerful individual. Although he is in deep waters he is still a political Goliath. Disposing of him won't be that easy. One of his closest allies is the President of the United States. How many strings can be pulled on the strength of that alone?
Another thing people must remember is that an indictment is not a conviction, it is a legal accusation. There is still a long process to go which could drag out for another year or more. I am not advocating Karl Rove nor am I trying to disprove the accusations. Rather I am advocating that people exercise patience and let the events unfold. Rome wasn't built in a day and the Bush administration is in no shape to take any mud to the face. The news media isn't either. They are not going to break this story until it's verifiable on court dockets. Well that's my 2 cents.
I do believe that this is the only solution.
Big money out - real people in.
Posted by Anjha at May 15, 2006 12:56 PMArrrrgh, Anjha, arrrrgh!!
Posted by Seven of Six at May 15, 2006 04:31 PM