Quixote1818
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-11-05 05:34 PM
Original message |
| When the investigation started wasn't Rove supposed to come forward? |
|
Edited on Mon Jul-11-05 05:34 PM by Quixote1818
Wasn't it obstruction of justice for Rove to not speak up once he knew they were trying to find out who leaked to Cooper?
Certainly they must have asked Rove under Oath if he was Coopers source or at a minimum asked him if he knew who the source could be. Even if they didn't I am sure Coopers name came up when Rove was around. Hell, Rove knew what he had done period, he should have come forward.
|
| ThoughtCriminal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-11-05 05:39 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. If Rove told the investigators the same thing |
|
McClellan says Rove told him back in 2003, he's definitely looking at criminal charges.
|
| tridim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-11-05 05:40 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. Yea, but this is BushCo we're talking about here |
|
They are honest and upfront about nothing.
|
| alfredo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-11-05 05:43 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. Bush said he would take care of the leaker. |
|
So far it appears he has.
|
| RC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-11-05 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 4. Are you accusing bu$h of saying a truth? |
|
:wow: What will they do next?
|
| alfredo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jul-11-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 5. The line between truth and lies is very gray for shrub. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts)     |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:08 PM
Response to Original message |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
