Patrick Fitzgerald Smear Countdown

The BBQ Pit
#1

As we all know, anybody who crosses President Bush is a scummy low-life Al Qaeda lover. I have two questions: What is the timeframe for Patrick Fitzgerald’s upcoming crucifixion, and what form will his passion take?

– When –

  1. It’s already started. You’re just not reading enough right-wing blogs.
  2. Tomorrow.
  3. As soon as the RNC finishes gathering dirt.
  4. Just before the grand jury finishes its work.
  5. Immediately after the indictments are handed down.
  6. Never. The Republican Party doesn’t operate like that.

– What –

  1. Partisan hack.
  2. Sexual deviant.
  3. Liberal.
  4. Ham-fisted screw-up.
  5. Terrorists’ friend.
  6. All of the above.
#2
  1. As soon as the RNC finishes inventing dirt and gets the whisper campaigns and push polls in place.
#3

For the few who may not recognize the name, Patrick Fitzgerald is the special prosecutor investigating the Valerie Plame leak.

#4

I’m going to offer a prediction here.

I predict that Karl Rove will not be prosecuted by Mr. Fitzgerald, but that other members of the administration or members of the press might be.

When that comes to pass, there will be a smear campaign indeed, but it will come from the political left.

#5

It looks like the answers are “1” and “3”, respectively.

#6

Isn’t Fitzgerald a Republican?

I think we shall see much head shaking and dismay that a loyal member of the Accepted should be so misguided and obstreperous. The tone will be resigned and regretful…and they’ll gut his funding and support for any campaign that he is associated with. His days as a Rep are over.

The GOP smear has already started–guy on NPR yesterday was calling the entire issue “alice in wonderland stuff”. Rove did no wrong, there is no “crime” etc. What I don’t understand is how Novak is made of Teflon here–but I am sure that will be explained anon.

Myself, I am enjoying the splitting hairs by a party that was enraged by the other side’s splitting of hairs. Apparently, integrity depends on which hairs are split(and by whom).

#7

I don’t know that Rove is totally blameless. But the more and more I hear about this case, the less I’m convinced that did anything that rises to the level of a crime.

Maybe he should lose his job. Maybe not. But the “get Rove” chorus is getting so loud that some of its more vocal members won’t be happy until Rove is in jail.

Since Rove isn’t going to jail, those folks would lash out. And don’t doubt for a second that Mr. Fitzgerald, an effective and honest prosecutor by all accounts, wouldn’t get smeared when it comes to pass.

#8

Count me among those who want him arrested. He deserves it.

#9

This sentence fragment is correct. If Rove is prosectuted, if Rove is convicted, if Rove is sentenced, he will certainly be pardoned before he spends so much as one single day in prison.

#10

Even if Rove did not technically break any laws, do you think Bush should go back on his word? He said he would fire the person or persons who leaked the name, did he not?

#11

He said he would “take care of them.” If you can find a more explicit promise of firing, please cite it.

#12

Oh, I’m sure your right that it was stated as weasely as you say.

#13

Give them a golden parachute, most likely.

#14

And a medal.

#15

Al Franken griped the other night about FOX news channel saying "The White House never promised they’d fire the source of the leak, only that the source would be ‘taken care of.’"They showed the clip of the President speaking as proof.

Franken’s rebuttal was a clip of McClellan, speaking for the White House of course, at a press conference within days of the President’s comment, responding to a question that yes, that explicitly meant that such a person would no longer be part of the administration. Perhaps the President didn’t say it, but “the White House” surely did.

I am looking for a transcript of that press conference currently, but I don’t have a lot of spare time today.

#16

Transcript: President Bush Holds Post-G-8 Summit News Conference

#17

Sweet, good one Squink. I didn’t even bother looking, I assumed weaselness totality.

#18

Thanks very much.

Given this, I do think Bush should fire anyone responsible. I likely would have thought so anyway.

It has not been shown conclusively that Rove was the source of the information. There has been an awful lot of conjecture to this effect, but that’s all it has been so far from any side.

As I said in another thread, I’m inclined here to let Fitzgerald do the job he was charged with, and let the chips fall when he is finished with it.

#19

Ahhh … the classic Republican double-invert strategy, responding to an embarassing situation by saying “up is down”:

“Joe Wilson isn’t the whistleblower … KARL ROVE is the whistleblower!”

“John Kerry isn’t a war hero … GEORGE BUSH is the war hero!”

Very Rovian, Mr. Moto.

#20

I don’t play by those rules.

An examination of my posts will show numerous times when I referred to John Kerry as a war hero - and also numerous times when I described Bush’s service as not heroic.

I’d be happy to provide you with numerous cites in this regard, but most folks here know I’m telling the truth in this particular case.

Again, Karl Rove might be innocent, or tainted to some degree. But it doesn’t look to me like he committed any crime.

That’s just how I see it, and this honestly held opinion isn’t “spin”.