Susu's Hubby:

[Arne]: "Actually, he is. He decided to come clean during his grand jury testimony, apparently,"

So if that is the case then he didn't lie to begin with or he would be charged with perjury.

You're talking yourselves in so many circles here that I'm starting to get dizzy.

I'm not the one having problems thinking. If it could be shown he lied to the grand jury, you can bet there'd be indictments. If what he did was give incomplete, evasive, or even arguably false statements to the FBI and/or first grand juries, he might get off the hook. FWIW, Rove's defence of his changed story (according to his lawyers) was that he "forgot" about certain things, and that the Viveca Novak stuff "refreshed" his memory (well, maybe that and the e-mails) and now he wanted to sing a different tune and fess up to outing Plame.
But there's no disagreement from anyone (including Rove's lawyers) that Rove did indeed change his story. They had to plead that he was 'really, really forgetful' and that he didn't snooker the first questioners on purpose. Fat chance of that for a person as meticulous (and as slimy) as Rove is. Apparently Fitzgerald didn't think he could get a conviction "beyond reasonable doubt" on the evidence. But face it, Rove fibbed the first time and only changed his sotry when it became clear that others wer going to dispute his account.

He wasn't indicted either for the outing or for perjury.

The outing requires a number of elements including "intent" that may have been hard to prove. Fitzgerald explained this in his Libby press conference.

Libby wasn't indicted for the outing. Just for perjury. We'll wait for the trial to see if that holds.

See above. FWIW, the White House outed Plame. There's no doubt on that count. That was wrong. Proving the specific crime was committed by a specific person is the harder part.


Starting to get the picture here, pal?

I've had "the picture" from a long time back, buddy. I've read "Bush's Brain", by James Moore, and know just what kind of a slimeball Rove is. You ought to as well. Would open your eyes up a bit about the folks you're defending.

You guys are starting to believe the fantasies that you have created in your head due to your hatred of this administration.

Ummm, not me. Seems that the person that is seeing hallucinations here is you.

Liberals (or progressives or whatever you're calling yourselves today) are still losing ground in the elections. Take the election in CA last week as proof.

Huh?!? You talking Bixby? She came a lot closer than any Democrat has come in a long time in that district.

I mean...if a liberal loses in California then you guys may as well just stop now and start getting ready for 2012.

I thnk you're just confused. Matter of fact, that's almost a certainty. Do you really think that California has no Republicans in office?

The mid-terms and the next Presidential election are still safe in conservative hands.

Thank God for that.

Oh, so God's on your side. My, I'm quaking. I'd just reference Bobby Zimmerman's views on that....

Cheers,