If Karl Rove began to sing, George W. and Dick Cheney will be in big trouble.
It is only logical that George W. will pardon Karl Rove to keep him quiet.
Does George W. Bush have to pardon Karl Rove in order to keep him quiet about some things he knows about?
Posted in Uncategorized.
– February 24, 2010
9 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
fitzgerald did not get enough evidence to convict rove. he could not prove that rove knew plame was undercover. intent is crucial.
If you use the other hand, it feels like someone else is doing it.
No pardon necessary.
It would be logical to pardon Rove to avoid the predictable line of political based criminal charges that are sure to be concocted.
of course
Funny question.
But why do blacks think that slavery was just a white slave owner deal and they don’t talk about the black slave owners which they do not talk about as well. Please see the link.
http://americancivilwar.com/authors/black_slaveowners.htm
Yes – together fat, pink, horrid little Karl and his friend, Li’l Bush, are into treason in the Beverly Plame case. I’ve been waiting for Li’l Bush to poop out a pardon for Karl.
A pardon before the conviction will be interesting, but Ford got away with it when he “pardoned” Nixon years ago. So it can be done.
Stand by for news – and then stand by for angry republican lies and denial.
There are suggestions when it comes to presidential pardons, one of them being that the person should have been convicted of the crime.
There may have been forty million to find out who Clinton was porking, but not one penny for the men responsible for porking us.
Has Rove been tried or convicted in a court of law?
No. Doesn’t a pardon generally follow a conviction of a crime?
Sorry, but I really am going to have to call BS on this question.