Quote:

the G-man said:
Quote:

the G-man said Sat Jul 02 2005 09:39 AM:
Even if true that Rove leaked the name, it has been noted on more than one occasion here that this was quite possibly not even a crime…the so-called "outing" of Plame was probably not criminal after all.



Quote:

the G-man said Mon Jul 11 2005 11:57 AM:
At this point, Rove is looking innocent



Quote:

the G-man said Fri Jul 15 2005 02:23 PM:
… Rove simply confirmed a fact that was already in circulation. He no more "outed" Plame than Wilson did when he peddled his "outing" allegation to various left-wing journalists after Novak's column ran.



Quote:

the G-man said Wed Apr 26 2006 01:32 PM:
If your source is correct, that would tend to mean he is not going to be indicted.



Lawyer: Karl Rove Won't Be Charged in CIA Leak Case

    President Bush’s political adviser Karl Rove won’t be charged with any wrongdoing in connection to the investigation of the leak of a covert CIA officer’s identity, Rove's lawyer said Tuesday.

    Rove learned of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's decision on Monday after he stepped off a plane in New Hampshire where he was delivering a speech to state Republican officials.

    “We believe that the special counsel's decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct,” Rove attorney Robert Luskin said in a statement. "In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation."

    Fitzgerald’s decision ends speculation into the investigation that started in 2004 that Bush could lose his longtime political aide if criminal charges came down against him.



so, your opinion as a lawyer, is that if someone isn't charged then they must be innocent?

Bow ties are coool.