TruthNot, having promised "a more comprehensive accounting" of their "Rove Indicted" debacle from last May 13, delivers a compelling graphic explaining why Special Counsel Fitzgerald can't be stopped in his pursuit of the Evildoers.
At least they remain true to the TruthNot motto - Speak Truth to Power, deliver BS to everyone else.
With almost as much seriousness, Marc Ash provides some text telling us that yes, Rove really was indicted. The short version is a re-hash of the fantasy still prevailing among lefties who can't let go - Rove has given up the key evidence on Cheney, who will be getting his come-uppance within the next 24 business hours (i.e., at about half-past never).
The TruthNot piece makes no sense, but let's highlight this special nonsense:
The electronic communication from Fitzgerald to Luskin, coming immediately on the heels of our Monday morning, June 12 article "Sealed vs. Sealed" that became the basis for the mainstream media's de facto exoneration of Karl Rove was, our sources told us, negotiated quickly over the phone later that afternoon.
Pretty good inside stuff, yes? The phone rings, Luskin is on the line, and the TruthNot source is there!
But wait! Who, other than Marc Ash, has forgotten their classic lead from the May 13 piece?
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm representing Karl Rove.
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.
Robert Luskin, Rove's attorney, did not return a call for comment. Sources said Fitzgerald was in Washington, DC, Friday and met with Luskin for about 15 hours to go over the charges against Rove...
How could sources who can tip TruthOut to a single phone call be wrong about a fifteen hour meeting? Or does TruthOut still fantasize that such a meeting occurred? Well, here is their current punchline:
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.
Wow - they spent fifteen hours reading "parts of the indictment" to Karl Rove and his attorney? That raises the bar on "tedium" to absurd heights - "Like watching paint dry" will never mean "boring" again.
Let's close with this:
That leaves the most important question: If our sources maintain that a grand jury has returned an indictment - and we have pointed to a criminal case number that we are told corresponds to it - then how is it possible that Patrick Fitzgerald is reported to have said that 'he does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove at this time?' That is a very troubling question, and the truth is, we do not yet have a definitive answer.
They don't have a definitive answer, but... the trial is not until next January, prosecutors aren't normally in the business of announcing non-indictments, so Keep Hope Alive!
MORE: J Pod thinks this is all about traffic and donor support at TruthNot. Here is an idea - Marc Ash should hint that Evil Forces are trying to quash and discredit their story, and it is only his readers and fellow fantasists that stand between Truth and the Dark Side. Ahh, yes.
GOOD POINT - I may have misinterpreted the graphic stolen shamelessly from a commenter at Donklephant. Maybe TruthNot is showing us how Evil Dick Cheney can be unstoppable in his intimidation of the Truth-Tellers. You make the call.
PROPS TO DU: A Democratic Underground sleuth debunked the TruthOut "sealed versus sealed" fantasy a while back. The gist - in the DC circuit, cases are assigned a docket number in sequence. A sealed case will still get a number in sequence, but will be missing from the docket.
And the case on which TruthNot pins their hopes, 06 cr 128, falls between two cases assigned numbers on May 16 and May 17.
Since Rove was indicted on May 12, that does not work.
Here is an excerpt. Good job.
The criminal docket doesn't list a 06-CR-128; it's completely missing from the docket. This is typical for sealed cases in the DC courts. However, we can tell when it was filed based on the dates of the surrounding cases. Here's the complete list of criminal cases filed in the DC district court from May 10 - May 23, 2006.
USA v. MANSOER Filed: 05/10/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. DORIUS et al Filed: 05/12/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. ABDOULAYE Filed: 05/12/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. CURRY Filed: 05/16/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. WASHINGTON Filed: 05/17/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. HILLIARD Filed: 05/18/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. MANOR Filed: 05/18/2006 Office: Washington, DC
USA v. GARCIA Filed: 05/23/2006 Office: Washington, DC
No 06-CR-128 listed at all. But the case before it, CR-127, was filed on May 16, 2006. And the case after it, CR-129, was filed on May 17, 2006. Therefore, we know that 06-CR-128 was filed either May 16 or May 17th. According to Leopold's original story, Rove was indicted (secretly) on May 12th. In his new "Sealed vs. Sealed" story, he says "As of Friday afternoon that indictment, returned by the grand jury the week of May 10th, remains under seal.. The case number is "06 cr 128." But based on the dates in the docket, that case cite CANNOT be the Rove indictment. This case was filed on Tuesday, May 16 or Wed., May 17th - NOT May 12th (when Fitz supposedly met w/the grand jury), and NOT during the week of May 7 - May 13th.
JUST IN: Don't ignore the possibility of time traveling aliens. I thought they were working for Karl, but maybe a rival faction interceded.