Posted on 10/31/2005 1:55:07 PM PST by RogerWilko
Between Harry Reid and Karl Rove, I predict Reid will be the first to be fired from his job. Harry should keep his head down and desperately hope that Rove's prodigious political skills aren't focused against him personally in the future.
I think that has been happening for a while, little by little. Hopefully many more will see the dems as they truly are.
Just imagine if we didn't have the internet and sites like FR. Now that's a scary thought for Halloween!
Since Schemuer's staffers ILLEGALLY obtained the creidt report of a political rival (the guy running for Governor in Maryland, can't remember his name). Then Pataki gets to pick Schumer's replacement!
I demand that Dana Milibank resign.
LOL
When will Harry Reid be indicted for funneling public works projects to his Sons and Sons in Law's firms???????????
I think Mr. Reid needs a little scrutinizing
Specifically, Hillary has told all Dims to demand Rove's firing. She must eliminate the brain trust who'll defeat her in the upcoming election............
What she doesn't realize is that WE will defeat her in 2008. H8 hates that.
MORE COWBELL!
what's a democrat anyway?????????????????
All you have to see is the name "Dana Millbank" and the discussion is over before it begins.
Who believes anything the guy says anyway. Like Rush keeps saying .. these people have no idea how they are perceived outside the newspaper office.
"If Bush is a man of his word, then he should let Rove go" Wait, since when did Bush promise to fire Rove?
I love the WaPo's,(synonymous with Whacko) throwing in the hoary old lie about Plame being 'outed' to punish Wilson for not agreeing with Brit Intel.
Which brings me to another point
How come everyone on the left's taking Wilson's word as better than Brit Intel?
Is Wilson the Moonbats' personal Karl Rove, an omniscient, evil genius?
Only time will tell.
'zactly
There is a rock solid principal in America whereby law enforcement MUST follow proper procedure, or ALL THEIR ARRESTS are deemed illegal and bogus.
For example, if police raid a home and find a triple murderer, that murderer will get off due to police malfeasance, and because they failed to follow proper procedure.
Likewise, when Fitzgerald determined that NO CRIME was committed in 2003 EVEN IF Libby DID reveal Wilson's wife, then he had a rock solid obligation to close up shop and notify the US Attorney General that his initial task was finished because no crime was committed.
If Plame WAS a covert agent like the federal statute was designed to prosecute, there is no doubt in my mind or anyone else's that Fitzgerald would have charged Libby with that specific offense.
But he didn't.
To me, that spells overzealous prosecutor who intended to charge someone come hell or high water.
Indeed. i refer to post # 31
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.