Karl Rove: Innocent or just getting off easy?

Do you think that Patrick Fitzgerald couldn't come up with enough findings of criminal conduct to indict Karl Rove or do you feel he had the evidence but it wasn't enough to win a conviction considering who he'd have to battle with? I think that there had to be significant evidence or the investigation of Karl Rove wouldn't have went on for this length of time. Some may try to say that this is because Fitzgerald refused to admit that he had no case. I personally believe that the special prosecutor showed restraint by taking the time to investigate as long as he did without bringing forth indictments. Lets be clear here, just with what we now know from Libby and Novak show that Rove was involved. Sure he did it so that he could claim he wasn't directly involved but if anyone believes that then... well... lets just say... remember who was behind the Bush mobile taking us to war. Did you believe them then? Do you believe them now? Did you learn your lesson? Today's outcome does nothing to prove the innocence of Karl Rove, only proves that justice doesn't always get its chance.