http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1221712#1221722Oh my.
Continuing on with the month-long celebration of the non-Indictment of Karl Rove:
haneGR (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 11:05 PM
Original message
I would like to apologize to Will Pitt for what I'm about to say...
Will,
I think you're a fantastic writer. Your books, your posts on DU, and your website. I think you have the potential to be a major news source for liberals in the decades to come.
But, retract your story. NOW. I understand you had your sources. I understand you believed what you were told.
What were you told? You were told that Leopold's story was true. That Fitzgerald spent multiple hours at Defense Council's office on Friday May 12th. That he was there for the purpose of serving Karl Rove with an indictment. That the indictment was served and that Rove was informed that he had 24 hours to "get his house in order." Eventually this was changed to 24 "business" hours, we're past that too. So basically we're left with the scenario of a sealed indictment. Do you really think that Karl Rove would have appeared on Capitol Hill TODAY in a publicized Republic Congressional meeting if he knew he had been indicted? You can call Rove whatever you want, devious, aggressive, liar, sychophant, mastermind, criminal, etc. but what you cannot call him is dumb. He has consistently behaved, for over 10 years now, in a manner not consistent with "dumb."
Sadly, it is looking more and more like that scenario is actually false. Personally, I think Rove's attorneys were being served with a target letter. Typically a Prosecutor in this circumstance would serve Rove with a target letter before indictment by the Grand Jury. And if you look at the timeline of past cases Fitzgerald has prosecuted, when an indictment was issued it was reported IMMEDIATELY. Your only saving grace would be the unusual step of a sealed indictment and an offer from the Prosecution to drop the charge if Rove will testify against the President or the Vice President. Highly unlikely.
Don't continue to stain yourself over this. We all want Rove indicted. But not at the cost of ruining the journalistic credibility of one of our brightest young stars. Admit fault, continue to write solid stories. Overall, focus on the longterm and not the short. Retract it.
Opening_Day (75 posts) Wed May-17-06 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Give it time - it's "business" hours after all!
Friday is the big day.
OldLeftieLawyer (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. But, but, but,
there's no such concept in the law.
That 24 hour thing was a riot. Whoever came up with that one had a really bad mescaline experience somewhere in the past, I think.
So, there's no such thing, and it's illusionary.
Friday has absolute no mystical significance. It's as relevant as today was. The grand jury is hearing other cases, you understand, don't you?
Friday is nothing but the day after Thursday and the one before Saturday.
smb (628 posts) Thu May-18-06 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #1
61. Yeah!
When you factor out lunch hour, coffee breaks, trips to the potty, butt-photocopying gags, schmoozing around the water cooler, useless staff meetings, etc, "24 business hours" could last forever.
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-17-06 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #2
32. The "problem" is that it's already been demonstrated as false.
The original story (do you need a link?) stated unequivocally that the "indictment" was a fait accompli, a done deal, a concluded enterprise.
I could write a story claiming there was a huge tornado that wiped out Tulsa as if it were factual...and when it appeared not to have happened, can I just say "well, it's coming....in 24 hours...or 24 'business hours'...or in 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 eons?"
The thing is, he could have avoided ALL of this controversy if he had just penned a story saying something like "Some sources have said there has been a signed indictment of Rove today...details to follow" but it didn't appear in print that way. The buck has to stop somewhere, it can't be passed off ad infinitum.
springhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Thu May-18-06 02:07 AM
Response to Reply #32
55. I am just amazed at the people.........
who are so distrusting of Will Pitt. What has he done or said to make anyone believe he would lie. And that is what people on this site are basically saying. He says they have many cooberating sources and some of the networks have confirmed the same story but have not been allowed by the top brass to report on it. From his journal:
Oh Fa Chrissake...
Posted by WilliamPitt in General Discussion
Sun May 14th 2006, 10:31 AM
1) It fosters a misinformed public. And if you don't think that's dangerous, then you haven't been paying close enough attention to Fox News. Or to Judith Miller's WMD reports for the NYTimes.
The report is unsubstantiated insofar as it has not been reported by the very media apparatus you, in your own words, disdain. The report is substantiated insofar as it has been cofirmed for truthout by several independent sources, sources that do not know who the other sources are and don't have any way to do some kind of coordinated disinformation burst.
4) Is there a reason, a point, or something beneficial for the public to gain by broadcasting unsubstantiated stories? How does it benefit the public to be led by the nose, tidbit-by-tidbit, with hints and clues about what 'may' or 'may not' occur?
Yes, there's a reason: it isn't unsubstantiated. We have several sources. Once again, it is only "unsubstantiated" because the mainstream media hasn't reported on it yet. They will...and when they do, you can look deep within and discover to your horror that you are as much of a lapdog for the corporate press as any other Fox-watching sucker. You're up on your hind legs, right now, begging for scraps from their table.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/WilliamPitt
Snivi Yllom (1000+ posts) Thu May-18-06 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #58
69. Don't forget Pitt blew it on Ohio 2004 reporting Kerry would fight
didn't happen
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/122404Y.shtml
Kerry to Enter Ohio Recount Fray
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Report
Thursday 23 December 2004
2004 Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry will file today, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, papers in support of the Green Party/Libertarian Party recount effort. Specifically, Kerry will be filing a request for expedited discovery regarding Triad Systems voting machines, as well as a motion for a preservation order to protect any and all discovery and preserve any evidence on this matter.
Triad Systems has come under scrutiny recently after Sherole Eaton, deputy director of elections for Hocking County, swore out an affidavit in which she described her witnessing the tampering of electronic voting equipment by a Triad representative. Rep. John Conyers, the ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, has requested an investigation into this matter by the FBI and the Hocking County prosecutor.
Truthout will have more on this specific Triad allegation later in the day.
Previously, the Green Party and Libertarian Party have not fared well in their efforts to get emergency orders regarding this matter in Ohio. In order to pass muster with a judge, the individual or group requesting an emergency order for such a recount must show both irreperable harm as well as a substantial chance for success on the merits. While Green and Libertarian representatives could theoretically be able to show irreparable harm, they could not establish a substantial chance for success on the merits, because no recount would deliver Ohio to either party.
Kerry's entry into this recount effort changes the math on this matter dramatically. He can likewise show irreparable harm, and unlike the Green and Libertarian candidates, he can also prove a substantial chance for success on the merits because he lost the Ohio vote by a statistical whisker.
It should be noted that Kerry's filing of these requests does not indicate his complete entry into the recount process, but does clearly indicate that he is moving decisively in that direction. His previous stance on the matter was based simply on his desire to defend the right to have a recount in the first place. The evidence of election tampering in Ohio, specifically surrounding Triad, has motivated him to actively join the fight. The Democratic Party is also quietly putting financial resources into the Ohio recount effort.
Perhaps the most significant aspect of all this, from the activist point of view, has been the effectiveness of the telephone calls and letters to Kerry. The activist push to get him involved had a significant effect on his decision to enter this effort. Likewise, calls to other Senators in order to convince them to join House members in challenging the election have likewise had significant effect. If such an effort continues, the activists involved will very likely see the desired result unfold.
Yeah, I remember how that went.
Nothing happened on December 24, 2004.
The Bostonian Drunkard said it was because the courthouse was closed for Christmas Eve, and promised the primitives it would be filed right after Christmas.
Christmas came and went, New Year's Day came and went.
The Bostonian Drunkard then said it was because the courthouse was operating at barely-minimal staffing because of the holidays, and promised the primitives it would be filed right after New Year's Day.
New Year's Day came and went.
Valentine's Day came and went.
franksolich's birthday came and went.
Arbor Day came and went.
Mother's Day came and went.
Father's Day came and went.....
With this cornucopia of holidays, the courthouse in Ohio apparently was never open.
Anyway, the whole bonfire's well worth looking at, at the link above.
