Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Karl Rove STILL not Indicted; Leftist Imbeciles Claim He Was
The question about holding on to a story is always one of judgment: if you have none, you will stick with a story no matter how bad or wrong it is.
This past week, we covered the story on Karl Rove's clearing in the fake Plame outing story - yet, despite this, a site called truthout.org, which announced (to some fanfare) in May that Rove was indicted, has refused to concede that, well, they were dead wrong.
It has been a week now. The response from the leftwing morons?
The story is correct - and Rove was indicted.
You heard it right.
Returning to "06 cr 128"
There is the new liberal standard:
It never happened? We believe it did. No facts? We have sources who tell us of different facts. The facts are accurate, even if the story is proven to be completely false.
This is what caused Danny Blather to get his balls caught in a vice over the fake Bush memos in 2004. Now these leftists cannot handle the truth, and cling to bullshit.
This is what people call delusional. And leftists suffer from it on a regular basis.
The question about holding on to a story is always one of judgment: if you have none, you will stick with a story no matter how bad or wrong it is.
This past week, we covered the story on Karl Rove's clearing in the fake Plame outing story - yet, despite this, a site called truthout.org, which announced (to some fanfare) in May that Rove was indicted, has refused to concede that, well, they were dead wrong.
It has been a week now. The response from the leftwing morons?
The story is correct - and Rove was indicted.
You heard it right.
Returning to "06 cr 128"
What will follow will be a rather frank discussion of our reporting of and involvement in the Rove indictment matter. If you like simple answers or quick resolutions, turn back now. This is our report to our readership. Our primary sources for this report are career federal law enforcement and federal government officials speaking on condition of anonymity. This report was developed under the supervision of all of Truthout's senior editors, which should be taken as an indication that we view this matter with the utmost seriousness.
For the record, we did reach Kimberly Nerheim, a spokesperson for Patrick Fitzgerald, and asked her these questions: Did a grand jury return an indictment of Karl Rove? Did Patrick Fitzgerald send a fax to Robert Luskin similar to that described in recent press reports? Is Patrick Fitzgerald's probe of the Plame matter still ongoing? Her response to each question was identical: "I have no comment."
The Rove indictment story is way beyond - in terms of complexity - any other story we have ever covered. In essence, we found out something we were not supposed to find out, and things exploded from there. We were not prepared for the backlash.
On Tuesday, June 13, when the mainstream media broke their stories that Karl Rove had been exonerated, there were frank discussions amongst our senior editors about retracting our stories outright. The problem we wrestled with was what exactly do we retract? Should we say that Rove had not in fact been indicted? Should we say that our sources provided us with false or misleading information? Had Truthout been used? Without a public statement from Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald we felt that it was premature to retract our report.
After spending the past month retracing our steps and confirming facts, we've come full circle. Our sources continue to maintain that a grand jury has in fact returned an indictment. Our sources said that parts of the indictment were read to Karl Rove and his attorney on Friday, May 12, 2006. Last week, we pointed to a sealed federal indictment, case number "06 cr 128," which is still sealed and we are still pointing to it. During lengthy conversations with our sources over the past month, they reiterated that the substance of our report on May 13, 2006, was correct, and immediately following our report, Karl Rove's status in the CIA leak probe changed. In summary, as we press our investigation we find indicators that more of our key facts are correct, not less.
[...]
Yes, it does appear that Truthout was used, but not lied to or misled. The facts appear to have been accurate.
There is the new liberal standard:
It never happened? We believe it did. No facts? We have sources who tell us of different facts. The facts are accurate, even if the story is proven to be completely false.
This is what caused Danny Blather to get his balls caught in a vice over the fake Bush memos in 2004. Now these leftists cannot handle the truth, and cling to bullshit.
This is what people call delusional. And leftists suffer from it on a regular basis.
