No Fitzmas for the LeftIt looks like the
libs have gotten to the bottom of the horse manure, and found no pony there yet again.
The prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case on Monday advised Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, that he would not be charged with any wrongdoing, effectively ending the nearly three-year criminal investigation that had at times focused intensely on Mr. Rove.This is obviously a blow to Jason Leopold, the Truthout writer who
claimed last month that Rove would be indicted in the next day or so. Actually it should have been obvious that Leopold was lying at the time; consider this portion of what he wrote:
During the course of that meeting, Fitzgerald served attorneys for former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove with an indictment charging the embattled White House official with perjury and lying to investigators related to his role in the CIA leak case, and instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning.First of all, what in the world is "24 business hours"? We all know that five business days is actually a week; is 24 business hours three days? And why would he give Rove that time anyway?
Truthout doubles down,
insisting their story was right, but, um, even if it's wrong, they're still important:
One negative consequence of the Rove indictment firestorm has been that so much of what we cover that is so important to the community has been pushed into the background. There's a war going on, the right to vote is in doubt, democracy itself is under attack. Let's work together to keep our focus.Rick Moran and Tom Maguire, two center-right bloggers who covered the case, were both convinced that Rove would indeed be indicted. I suspect that
Rick's right as to why:
I have my own ghosts to expunge here because for the last year I have been predicting that Rove would be indicted. Clarice Feldman at The American Thinker tried knocking some sense into me several times by telling me that Fitzy didn’t have a thing on Rove and that I was making way too much of press coverage of the story.Maguire notes that
he was moving towards the "no indictment" theory:
Let me gulp down some crow - last May 8, I pegged the probability of a Rove indictment at 70%; a few days ago, I marked that down to 50% - well, at least I had the trend right.Handling the story from the humor side
are the Commissar and
Allahpundit.
Did someone here order the crap sandwich?Meanwhile, Jason Leopold, of the laughably named Truthout.org, continues to spin bizarre fantasies about Sealed vs. Sealed, supposedly Karl Rove’s super double secret probation indictment.Ankle-Biting Pundits
has more.
All anyone ever did here was try to defend the President against the false allegations of a partisan hack by showing that he wasn’t just some independent voice. If there was a crime in that, then woe to any future administration that was trying to be undermined by a government agency.
