Thursday, October 27, 2005
NBC News' Norah O'Donnell speculated as to why neither Karl Rove or I. Lewis Libby have not resigned before possible indictments from special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
It was a major point that even knocked MSNBC's Chris Matthews off guard. Most White House advisors resign before indictments are levied. The rationale being that an underling's criminal problems should not interfere with the administration's ability to govern.
A cynic might point out this is evidence that indictments are, in fact, not going to be passed down on Rove or Libby. While this fact may be possible, it's still remote.
Regarding the fallout after indictments, it seems that President Bush will continue his blind loyalty to his advisors. He fought back critics who called for him to dismiss Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, after the Abu Ghraib photos and fiercely resisted firing anyone regarding the CIA leak investigation even after vowing to fire the "leakers".
Unless Rove or Libby or some other possible counsel resigns tonight, the prospect of indicted members of this administration advising the President is imminent.
What this will do is foster outrage on the left and further an unhealthy reverance of President Bush's loyalty even when his friends are in despair.
There's another ominous sign by the lack of resignations. It would make one wonder exactly what is this adminstration hiding other than lying about the reasons for war.
It's quite possible that these other elements are what Fitzgerald is looking into near the end of the grand jury's time. If not, why is the special prosecutor looking towards Italy and the forged documents claiming that Iraq bought uranium yellowcake from Niger?
It would serve the Bush administration well, on a political level, to cut ties with indicted members of their team. For the country, we can ill-afford to have our President's hands tied for the next three years because of it.
Posted by Steven Tavares at 10/27/2005