Sources withing the Fitzgerald Investigation say Rove NOT indicted....

[BooScout]

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/content/2006/05/out_out_damn_truth.html

<snip>

As more and more information comes in on the Jason Leopold-Truthout Karl Rove indictment non-story, it looks more and more like the story was without truth. Sources within the Patrick Fitzgerald investigation into the CIA leak case tell us Rove wasn't indicted 10 days ago and may not be indicted. If an indictment is to come, it has not come yet. The case they say is incomplete.

---------------------

Hmmmmmm.

[annabanana]

1. Now THAT sounds like a fictional character..

"a leaker within the PF investigation"

sure...

[H2O Man]

2. Mr. Luskin. n/t

[ReadTomPaine]

8. Needless to say...

Spot on.

[depakid]

3. Pot- meet kettle.

:eyes:

[HereSince1628]

5. You beat me to it!

:rofl:

[HereSince1628]

4. Well it seems the pot is calling the kettle black

Crikey

[neoblues]

6. If True: Bummer...

But it's not over just yet. Even if it was, given the depth and breadth of the corruption in our government, it's a shock that Fitzgerald has gotten this far--been this much of an annoyance. Probably nobody has ever deserved to be indicted in more, or more serious crimes than this particular blossom of turds (just getting his boss elected to political office was indeed a high crime owing to what he's done to us with that office). If nothing else, at least we can hope it continues to keep him busy (and therefore leaves Bush trying to pretend he knows what he's doing without anyone to keep him from screwing up massively).

[DoYouEverWonder]

7. Try again

CHB is not a credible source.

[IntravenousDemilo]

9. As Hamlet said,

If it be now, ’tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all.

Just be ready for what happens, when it happens, and try not to be too gleeful or disappointed.

[livvy]

10. Capitolhillblue has been very critical about the story from day 1...

and rather nasty to boot.
I think I'd rather put my faith in Truthout, regardless of the outcome of the story.

[Gman]

11. Truthout gets no sympathy from me

they set theirselves up for this. They were presented with a "too good to be true" situation. And to top it off, in their breathless excitement, TO had what they believed was good sourcing. But everyone knows anything too good to be true probably is. They ran with the story anyway. I simply didn't buy the story because no one else was able to substantiate it, including the MSM. And yes, Leopold's "checkered past" was a big reason. The rest of Truthout is guilty of believing him and his sources. I thought it was hilarious that weekend that people kept K&R'ing to Greatest status any thread that mentioned TO, Will Pitt or Jason Leopold.

And to leave no blame unplaced, my suspicions about the veracity of the whole Rove indictment story were really raised by Madsen's reporting that Gonzales met with the grand jury. Its common knowledge that Ashcroft recused his self shortly after the investigation began. There is no reason to believe Gonzales would suddenly reverse that recusement and present the appearance of tampering with the grand jury. The Bush regime is a lot of things but they are not stupid.

Truthout and any other Internet "journalist" (and I use the term loosely) that echoed this non-story get no sympathy from me. You stick you neck out like that and it can get cut off. Sometimes it grows back.

[kstewart33]

12. CHB? Please.

What an outfit. I'm still looking for one story, just one, on their site that is factually correct.

[grytpype]

13. Once again, CHB guesses correctly.

[Loge23]

14. There are no sources.

Deal with it already. This investigation is virtually leak-proof. No one knows anything at all.
We can hope, that's all. But let's stop all of this mindless speculation.