Is Karl Rove Being Indicited today????????

[brettdale]

If so, when will they make the annocument, there is nothing on the nes programmes yet.

[Taxloss]

1. Depends who you listen to. n/t

[BlueEyedSon]

2. Time will tell whether this prediction will come to pass

[zanne]

3. As of yet, it's just a rumor.

Stay tuned. There were no reports that he'd be indicted today. The "Truthout" article said sometime this week. I'll be on pins and needles all week, hoping for a GD miracle.

[liberalnurse]

4. I'm getting a sense that it will be by

Wednesday......if not Tuesday.

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. I believe he's already been indicted

but that it is still under seal.

However, anything under seal is secret and remains under seal until the JUDGE DECIDES to unseal it.

[Jersey Devil]

6. Which is why any talk of Rove being given 24 hours is baloney

If an indictment is under seal it cannot be served on a Defendant as reported by Jason Leopold. If it is not under seal it can be served, but then it also would be public and filed with the courts as a public record so we'd know about it.

[DoYouEverWonder]

9. Not necessarily

The prosecutor and defendant can work out all sorts of deals beforehand. Especially since this investigation involves the office of the President, Fitzgerald will probably allow for Bush & Co to have some notice before anything major is made public.

[Jersey Devil]

10. Sorry, no, he cannot present a sealed indictment to anyone

He can give the Defendant a chance to turn himself in at which time an indictment would be presented and unsealed but he cannot give him a copy as Leopold reported.

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. Where did you see that?

Just because the prosecutor gives a high profile defendent a heads up, doesn't mean that anyone is handing out copies of a sealed anything.

[Jersey Devil]

13. Right in Leopold's Truthout story

"Fitzgerald served attorneys for former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove with an indictment"..

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/051306W.shtml

A "head's up" to allow a Defendant to show up in court at a certain date and time to be served with the indictment and arraigned, fine, but service of a sealed indictment ahead of time? Sorry, cannot be done.

[Jersey Devil]

15. PS - I am not saying leopold is completely wrong

but he obviously is wrong about any indictment already being given to Rove's lawyers. He could be right about everything else, but with this type of a glaring error I am skeptical.

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. Is it poor writing?

Everywhere else, including the title says pending indictment?

The paragraph you sight has already been edited once to change 24 hours to 24 business hours. Seems Jason is getting a little ahead of himself.

[Jersey Devil]

19. He is a professional writer

For goodness sakes, I'd think he'd know the difference between serving someone with an indictment or simply letting the Defendant's lawyer know when to show up for court to be served with one.

I didn't mention it, but this "24 business hours" edit also sounds like the strangest communication I've ever heard. Who speaks like that? "You have 24 business hours?" Fitz would have said, "You have three days". Have you ever in your life heard anyone say "24 business hours" in any context whatsoever?

[yodermon]

27. 24 business hours.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=%2224+business+hours%22&btnG=Search

It does not mean "3 days." (8 hours * 3)
It means 24 hours from Now, unless 24 hours from Now lands on a weekend, in which case it means at the same time on Monday.

Now, having said that, I agree that it's a bit fishy for Leopold to go change his terminology to this. Why didn't he just say "you have the weekend"?

[Jersey Devil]

28. Even then, however, to get what affairs "in order"?

That's something a judge would say to a defendant when he is sentenced and about to go to prison. Rove, even if indicted, would be released ROR just as Libby was. He is not going anywhere and has no reason to get his "affairs in order." Fitz would have to be a moron to make a statement like that and we know he is no moron.

[Clark2008]

23. That's not technically true.

Fitzgerald or any of his agents can serve the sealed indictment anytime after it's been handed-down. He could go immediately after the Grand Jury foreman signed it or wait a day or two.

However, to UNSEAL the indictment, Rove either would have to be booked, which creates a public document, effectively unsealing the indictment by proxy OR an arraignment would need to occur in front of the presiding judge. The indictment is not technically unsealed until another legal avenue is addressed - either an arrest and booking or an arraignment.

In this case, it looks, if we're to believe the Truthout story, as though a professional courtesy was awarded Rove (afterall, he's not really a flight risk because of his notoriety) and they're allowing him to get his affairs in order before either booking him and/or arranging him (both will occur - but it doesn't matter which occurs first). Therefore, he could be served with the sealed indictment and told to appear before the judge on Tuesday for an arraignment, which would then unseal the indictment.

That said, these avenues may be different in different states and districts. I covered police and courts for eight years as a reporter in Tennessee and South Carolina and that's how things work regarding sealed indictments here.

[Jersey Devil]

26. Where are you getting your info from?

Prosecutors simply do not go walking around with copies of sealed indictments. He cannot serve it on a Defendant. Indictments are not "handed up" to a prosecutor. They are handed up to the court - That Fitz could serve a sealed indictment is just bunk.

[DoYouEverWonder]

30. Rove is no ordinary citizen

He is a top White House Official.

Fitzgerald is very aware that this investigation will have enormous repercussions. It is more then appropriate for him to go to Rove and to Bush to make allow the WH to make arraignments to respond to any major public announcement.

Rove's indictment is no longer a question of if but when. Since major national security and constitutional issues are a stake here, what we see played out in the public will be agreed upon by both sides of the investigation before hand.

[symbolman]

7. YES

Today and EVERY DAY until Leopold get's his "scoop".. best way to handle it really, just predict each week for a month and BINGO, when they do it, YOU WIN :)

[HereSince1628]

8. Hey, hope this post means everything is OK.

[symbolman]

14. Oh I'm fine

I, uh, lost a contact lens.. yeah, yeah.. that's the ticket :)

It was something that looked like it was going to be very viral and hurt some people we all admire and I wanted to make sure it didn't spread all over the web..

Appreciate the thought :)

[alcibiades_mystery]

12. Don't hold your breath...

;-)

[linazelle]

24. Such glee. I wonder why....

:sarcasm:

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stepnw1f]

31. Lol (nt)

[Radio_Guy]

16. Yes, per William Pitt and Jason Leopold

I have the utmost faith in those two. If they say Rove will be indicted this week, bank on it. It will happen.

[Jersey Devil]

17. But that is NOT what they said - they said he WAS indicted

In fact, the article says Rove has already been served with the indictment, something impossible if it is under seal.

[Radio_Guy]

21. Ok, so I typed it wrong

I meant to say If Will says he was indicted, then mark it down it will be announced this week. Look, journalistic credibility means a lot. William Pitt would rather end his career looking like Bob Woodward than Geraldo Rivera. There is a lot riding on this. Don't you think he would have every I dotted, every T crossed and every fact checked?

[Jersey Devil]

22. The article is, at the very least, sloppy

At the very least the article should have been run by some lawyers who would have told him in a split second that you don't serve indictments on Defendants outside of court that are under seal. Obviously that was not done so I don't see how any i's were dotted or t's crossed.

I think Will Pitt is sincere, but sincerity does not necessarily mean accuracy.

[Codeine]

20. So what's the limit on that?

If he's indicted next week are you still going to say TO and JL got it right? Two weeks? Three? At what point is it speculation and predicting the inevitable rather than a scoop?

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. Where did you get that idea?

:shrug: