Why hasn't Rove resigned yet?

[FSogol]

Why aren't more Democrats calling for his resignation?

Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?

[librarycard]

1. Why was Libby allowed to hold his position so long

when the charges against him are so fundamentally clear?

[porphyrian]

3. For both libby and rove, doing so would be admitting they are wrong...

...and you I know they can't do that, despite the evidence shoved in their fucking faces.

[niyad]

2. because they are all arrogant thugs who think they can get away with

absolutely anything, with no consequences. and they don't give a damn about any of us, or the law, or even basic decency.

[emulatorloo]

4. because he is wearing a wire?

I can dream can't I?

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. Democrats ARE calling for his resignation

It's just not getting air time.

As for why he hasn't resigned...well, he's still working on cutting deals with the prosecutor. The WH may be holding it's breath given all of the dirty deals this pondscum has 'architected'.

[FSogol]

6. I do not buy, the "Not getting air time excuse"

They are professional politicians, they need to figure out how to get air time. The know how to get $$$ for reelections, its time to figure out how to get their messages across.

[SoCalDem]

8. In case you don't know this,

Corporate NEWS media does not SELL time on the news.."Advertising" is not the same thing as having a "prompter reader" report an item as news...

The screaming head shows have bookers who decide who will be allowed/invited, and who will not. Can't buy your way onto those shows..

The liberal opinion is always in short supply on "mainstream" medfia..has been for a long time now..The time necessary to report that side is not even for sale.. Donahue is a prime example..he had the highest rated show, and was yanked because of the liberal slant..

[SoCalDem]

7. Because "he got away with it again" and has NO plans to leave

Until he's indicted, he will not leave, and even then he may weasel a way to stay until "convicted".. Remember how *² kept moving the bar? He said if anyone is GUILTY..Indicted is not the same as proven guilty in court..

This crew knows how to run out the clock..If Rover gets indicted, he'll stay on because (it's a witch hunt) and as *²'s term winds down, he'll be pardoned and probably never be determined guilty of anything except "loving God and serving his master faithfully".:puke:

[MostlyLurks]

9. From a political standpoint, it makes no sense to resign.

If he resigns, he gets the same mental treatment as do those who take the 5th amendment: he resigned, so he must be guilty. That will cast an even bigger shadow than Libby.

Even if he is later found innocent or goes unindicted, the damage to the image will have been done. Resigning now, with no indictments handed down, is a losing proposition no matter what Fitz does later.

On the other hand, if he stays in place and DOES get indicted, there's no discernible extra damage that comes as a result of him staying (note that Libby's indictment has not lead to any discussion of "should he have resgined sooner") because the focus is on the charge, not on the fact that he kept his position. And if he is not indicted at all, he can claim he knew he was in no danger at any point, etc etc.

Rove will not resign, even if he wants to, simply because it's bad politics to do so.

Mostly

[WI_DEM]

10. No the question is "Why hasn't Bush fired him?"

there is enough questions emerging about his role in Plame that an ethical president would have fired him by now.