Since Karl Rove makes yet another appearance before the Grand Jury today (his fifth), I thought it would be nice to reconstruct Rove's history of testimony. As Christy said this morning, it's quite unusual for someone to appear before the GJ so many times, so let's revisit what we know (or at least what we've heard) about the ever-evolving story of Karl Rove.
Karl Rove, as we now know, spoke to Robert Novak on Wednesday July 9, 2003 -- three days after Joe Wilson's op-ed appeared in the NYT (Waas 12/16/05). On either July 10 or 11, Libby and Rove spoke about Plame (Libby indictment ). On July 11, Rove spoke with Cooper (Cooper's Time Magazine article). On Monday, July 14 the Robert Novak column appeared.
Yet according to Murray Waas' March 8, 2004 article, this is what Rove initially told the FBI when questioned in October, 2003:
President Bush's chief political adviser, Karl Rove, told the FBI in an interview last October that he circulated and discussed damaging information regarding CIA operative Valerie Plame with others in the White House, outside political consultants, and journalists, according to a government official and an attorney familiar with the ongoing special counsel's investigation of the matter.
But Rove also adamantly insisted to the FBI that he was not the administration official who leaked the information that Plame was a covert CIA operative to conservative columnist Robert Novak last July. Rather, Rove insisted, he had only circulated information about Plame after it had appeared in Novak's column. He also told the FBI, the same sources said, that circulating the information was a legitimate means to counter what he claimed was politically motivated criticism of the Bush administration by Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
Rove and other White House officials described to the FBI what sources characterized as an aggressive campaign to discredit Wilson through the leaking and disseminating of derogatory information regarding him and his wife to the press, utilizing proxies such as conservative interest groups and the Republican National Committee to achieve those ends, and distributing talking points to allies of the administration on Capitol Hill and elsewhere. Rove is said to have named at least six other administration officials who were involved in the effort to discredit Wilson.
[]
According to sources, Rove, in his interview with the FBI, said that he and others on the White House's political staff wanted to contain the political fallout from Wilson's allegations, and that they thought the charge of favoritism was a legitimate issue. Rove added that when he steered others in the direction of the now-disproved charges, he believed them to be true, in part because he regarded Novak as a credible news source.
Rove used the same cover story Libby did -- "I heard it from journalists." He heard it from Bob Novak, don't you know -- a "credible news source."
According to Waas' July 19, 2005 article, Rove did not mention the Cooper conversation either in this initial FBI interview:
White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove did not disclose that he had ever discussed CIA officer Valerie Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper during Rove’s first interview with the FBI, according to legal sources with firsthand knowledge of the matter.
The omission by Rove created doubt for federal investigators, almost from the inception of their criminal probe into who leaked Plame's name to columnist Robert Novak, as to whether Rove was withholding crucial information from them, and perhaps even misleading or lying to them, the sources said.
Also leading to the early skepticism of Rove's accounts was the claim that although he first heard that Plame worked for the CIA from a journalist, he said could not recall the name of the journalist. Later, the sources said, Rove wavered even further, saying he was not sure at all where he first heard the information.
It seems like every appearance Rove has made before the grand jury has been to walk back the incorrect information he gave the FBI in the first place (which no doubt matched up with Libby's quite well). Rove thinks he is awfully clever and can talk himself out of just about anything, and I am certain Fitzgerald is more than willing to give him enough rope.
But unless Fitzgerald has grown a bit more credulous and is now buying the "I forgot" routine that worked so well for Scooter Libby, I'd say today's attempts at spinning this as a "good" thing for Team Rove are GOP pipe dreams.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Holy Christ! From Raw Story:
REPORT: ROVE RECEIVED TARGET LETTER… MORE SOON
FITZ
oh, and Fitz!
hurm
WooHoo! Get ‘em Fitz!!
http://www.dubyaD40.com
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042606I.shtml
target letter leopold story
From TruthOut.org:
Target Letter Drives Rove Back to Grand Jury
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042606I.shtml
Anybody remember the time frame between the last Libby visit to the JG and his indictment?
Just askin’
truthout with the scope on the target letter:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042606I.shtml
Lawrence O’Donnell at HuffPo:
If Fitzgerald asked Rove to return to the grand jury, that means Fitzgerald thinks he doesn’t have enough for an indictment. If Rove asked to return to the grand jury, that means Rove’s lawyer, Bob Luskin, believes an indictment is imminent and is sending his client back to make a final desperate attempt to avoid indictment.
Any thoughts, ladies?
That picture is great. I hope we’ll get an untouched one of those soon.
I’ll be delighted
if Rove’s indicted…
[sung to I’m so excited…whateverthetitleis….]
Way kewl on the graphic, Jane! Love it!
We know Fitzgerald hates people lying to him or obstructing his investigations, perhaps even more than most prosecutors. We have also seen that Fitzgerald is one cool cucumber when it comes to building his case and nailing people. I think these facts, combined with Rove’s unprecedented number of visits, could easily lead one to believe Rove is talking himself into a long, long prison stay.
The only other explanation would be that Rove has turned state’s evidence and is spilling his guts. But then, why would they make that a high-profile event? If Rove is living the snitch life I’d think they’d keep that as quiet as possible. Gosh, maybe Rove’s been wearing a wire in the White House.
Jane, Christy, here is why folks in the “fever swamp” matter:
“When an entire field is headed in the wrong direction, when the routine application of mainstream thinking has produced disastrous results….then it probably took someone from outside to point out the obvious.” —Alan Ehrenhalt
-GSD
I read somewhere that Fitz had SEIZED hard drives from administration computers.
Is there any documentation to this?
How do you get a search warrant to search the Executive Offices? If it’s true, when this is over, that petition is going in the Smithsonian.
Also according to Truthout:
Should Wednesday’s court appearance by Rove provide the grand jury with answers to lingering questions, Rove may not be charged with obstruction of justice, but will likely be indicted for perjury and lying to investigators, sources close to the case said.
Christy– why are my comments both here and on the last thread awaiting moderation? Has not happened since the initial conversion to wordpress.
Jane — the more I think about this, the more I have trouble coming up with happy, cheerful reasons for Rove to visit the G/J for a fifth freaking time. Every time your client goes under oath, their ass is hanging way, way out the window and there is a huge, oncoming semi with perjury painted on the side of it coming the other way. You never, ever, ever let them expose that much to legal jeopardy without a damn good reason to do so — and that usually involves serious jail time threats or some sort of deal. This is an unusual case, so the normal sorts of rules don’t always apply, but there just is no way to spin this as a happy happy, joy joy moment for Karl Rove. No one — and I mean NO one — enjoys being in front of a G/J, not even the prosecutors. Too many chances for you to trip up on your words, your questions, the witness answers, etc. — it’s nervewracking under the best of circumstances when you are the person doing the indicting, let alone when you are the person facing indictment. The level of BS that you have to be willing to swallow to believe this is a good thing is just way, way too high. Man, I have never wanted to be a fly on the wall so badly as right now. If anyone works for a local pizza delivery in the DC metro area near wherever Fitz and Co. have offices and can let us know if there is a big pie order this evening, I’d really appreciate it. *g*
Love the photo too, but let’s face it, Karl wishes he looked that good in a suit.
Jason Leopold confirms target letter.
I gave Karl a TARGET LETTER. So once again, he and Robert Luskin rush to try and head off the indictments. Next!
http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com
OT –
was just on phone to Reps office in DC re: net neutrality. (If you call, have the BILL NUMBER)
anyway, if I’m ever in a position to use it, I ask the coiner tm permission:
FItzMate!
Well, the rawstory scoop is actually Leopold’s. Not much new here except his assertion that Rove received a target letter.
I wonder if said letter came two weekends ago, right around the time the NY Sun published the INR memos. That’s when Luskin finally piped up again. It also was right before Rove’s “lateral” move.
My bet is that today’s GJ testimony was asked for by the grand jurors themselves. If that’s true, then look for indictments soon.
I believe, I believe, I believe….
I’m getting giddy…
I think the “photo” is one of Dood Abides’ masterpieces from a series on frogmarching oh about a year ago.
Great ain’t it?
Jane-
What does it mean by my name that my comment is awaiting moderation?
Looks like Rove is merely trying to mitigate his losses. He knows he is getting charged but just how many charges is now the question.
Bush is so helpless without Roves’ steady hand that he is keeping him on knowing that an indictment is imminent.
We will see the argument that Bush would fire anyone guilty of leaking a CIA ops name to the press. “I never said I would fire a perjurer or an obstructor. Because, I’m the decider, that’s why”.
-GSD
angie at 17 — I dunno. Sometimes our spam filter picks things out with links in them. I’ll check and see, but as you guys know, I’m not really all that tech savvy. *g*
This is the GOP Chernobyl - this whole rogue terror state is going down with associated Vichy Dem and MSM collateral damage in the millions.
FITZO DE MAYO!
What a great time to be alive as a long international nightmare slowly lifts and snow softly falls. Let’s always remember this Mayday as we take it back from the Christopher Hitchens red fascists and let’s make it what it was originally designed for. A celebration of libertarian and directly democratic socialism untainted by any kind of state terror.
The criminal cabal that disgraced true freedom is going to jail while we will build a new netcentric socialist world system that will finally bring justice to all.
Thank you Fitz, FDL and Feingoldien’s everywhere. It’s a beautiful morning on the internet.
Never mind, it’s gone now.
What a day for America. I’m taking a break for ritual blessings. Before I do, just wondering how long it will be before all the traffic tonight will shut us down. You just know that eveyone now knows this is THE place to go for Plamegate and Fitz discussion and for that I want to thank Jane and Christy for keeping us so well informed and focused. It’s been a long time since October and the Libby indictment and a lot of theories and thoughts have been registered here. It has been fascinating.
I sincerely hope that this target letter means an indictment is forthcoming. For those who remember when Me3 was me, his descriptions of Fitz have been right on (even if he was so spooky at first we thought he might be an insane troll). There has been lots of reassurance and reminders to keep the faith from you know who, and amazing celebrations of the smallest of moves toward the truth. Maybe, just maybe, we are seeing a tiny light at the end of the tunnel.
That is a great photo.
Zennurse - I answer the Kazuza question at the end of the last thread. One note, Bill then got drunk on the malt liqour and was using Catherine’s words on the air. :)
Christy–
Assuming the Leopold scoop to be true, is it possible that the GJ is tying up loose ends on its own before indictments are handed up? Meaning, they thought it only fair that they hear from the target himself (instead of just relying on FBI-read testimony?)
That to me seems to be the most parsimonious answer. And, Luskin could try to spin it as “Fitzgerald asked us to testify voluntarily,” implying that Fitz’s case isn’t as solid as he’d like us to believe.
BTW, I also find the comment in Peter Yost’s AP article that this is only the 2nd time Fitzgerald has met with this particular GJ to be wildly implausible. Would he have presented his entire case in December and left them hanging for this long, particularly if he’d recently gotten new evidence about missing emails?
I love the picture too, but is it wrong to hope that he resists arrest and they have to rough him up a bit? Just a bloody nose, even. And / or a missing tooth.
I wish I could believe Jason Leopold, but he has disappointed me far too many times.
10 Leonard says:
April 26th, 2006 at 12:53 pm
Lawrence O’Donnell at HuffPo:
If Fitzgerald asked Rove to return to the grand jury, that means Fitzgerald thinks he doesn’t have enough for an indictment. If Rove asked to return to the grand jury, that means Rove’s lawyer, Bob Luskin, believes an indictment is imminent and is sending his client back to make a final desperate attempt to avoid indictment.
Any thoughts, ladies?
———————————————–
I disagree with O’Donnell’s assessment. I think Fitz may have invited Rove to meet the new grand jury out of a sense of fair play. When you’re being investigated by a grand jury, you have a right to testify before them. I think indicting Rove without letting him stand before the new grand jury would’ve seemed like a cheap shot to Fitz.
Christy– never mind– the one on the other thread does not have it anymore and the post I had here just went poof, gone!
I applaud your ambition, and these are great links to the early stuff, but you are slacking off - the whole story about the missing Hadley e-mail may be what gets Rove indicted, amd you slid right past it.
You know the story, but the Anonymous Liberal had good coverage following the Viveca Novak revelations.
FWIW - Karl’s devotees (My job, and it does not pay enough on days like this) will note that a prosecutor’s guidlines urge him to decline to call to the GJ people he is going to indict, especially for perjury/obstruction. Libby, for example, never got a chance to go back after his March 2004 appearances.
Bonus Spin - the whole Woodward - Mystery Source debacle may have Fitzgerald in a bind. Just why, a curious reporter or grand juror might ask, are we indicting Karl Rove for forgetting a talk with Cooper when we are not indicting someone (Armitage?) for forgetting a talk with Woodward?
Or, why are we indicting Rove for leaking when we are not indicting Armitage?
The possibility that this will look a lot like selective prosecution may be posing a puzzle. I say *MAY*.
Here is a WaPo article on the man who leaked to Novak and Woodward, then obstructed the investigation, but whose identity remains concealed:
…[Judge] Walton said the source’s identity is not relevant, and there is no reason to sully the source’s reputation because the person faces no charges.
Redd, Immanet., loosehead, epu, mary, et al-
Can anyone please explain how a “target” letter is delivered, and how such information becomes public, if at all?
Thanks
I’ll say it again: There is no “good” way to appear before a grand jury. It may not be really bad, say if you are a witness (and not a subject or target), but it won’t be good. And if it is your fifth time, go with really bad.
I don’t know if I have ever heard of anyone going before a grand jury 5 times. It may not be unprecedented, but it has to be extremely rare and can never lead to anything but bad things.
Larisa Alexandrovna writes
“The unmasking of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson by White House officials in 2003 caused significant damage to U.S. national security and its ability to counter nuclear proliferation abroad, RAW STORY has learned.
According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.”
I wonder how the right is going to spin Plame’s duties if this story is correct.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2....._0213.html
Anyone have an extra f5 key laying around just in case?My refresh key is gettin’ hammered today!;)
CNN just reported that Luskin said Rove has NOT gotten a target letter. Of course, that may mean nothing…
While I’m chewing on today’s events, here’s a question: Anonymous sources have been saying for a while that Rove was increasingly sure that he wasn’t going to be indicted. Do we think it was mere spin, or do we think that he really did believe that he’d gotten away with it?
Oh, when the frogs go marching out
Oh, when the frogs go marching out
How I long to be seeing that footage
When Mr. Rove gets frog-marched out!
(I still wish someone with better audio skills than I would put together a version of the Darth Vader march made up of frog croaks, a la the dog-bark “Jingle Bells.” I think it would be the perfect soundtrack.)
Well….Rover is still with the GJ? That’s….3 hours now? That’s alot of Q&A going on.
Ghostman
3 hours=a few loose ends.
-GSD
Leonard, 10, some speculation on prior thread about this. IMO O’Donnell’s source on this is Rove’s attorney,
gold barsLuskin, not the “the buzz among the Washington Press Corps,” as O’Donnell claims. Also O’Donnell appears to be planting a question, that Luskin wants to be asked, when he and Karl exit, did Rove request the 5th GJ appearance?Luskin got the target letter, therefore he can say Rove didn’t get it.
We know your games Goldbars. We are on to you.
-GSD
‘Please…Lend your little ears to my pleas…’
;>)
Jeralyn has weighed in with a very interesting perspective. She seems to think Rove is singing his heart out.
I hope that Joe and Valerie Wilson will soon share a bottle of celebratory champagne and the little ones can have sparkling cider– they deserve to watch a frogmarch very soon. ;) All of progressive blogosphere can raise a virtual glass to them and Fitz and his team. As for the wingnuts and the admin, let them eat cake!
Tom Maguire — sorry but the production of the Viveca Novak bs was all an attempt to provide cover for Rover’s memory failures, an excuse for why he
liedforgot to the FBI in the first place.Best of luck with that Armitage thing, though.
Edited by site owner
Please do not include entire, copyrighted articled in your comments. That’s what links are for.
I would have to think that even if Rove sings his little heart out, that he would still serve time. Wouldn’t he?
Sounds like Rover asked to address the GJ- thinking that he was about to be indicted and figuring that he could confuse the hell out of them with his bullshit.
This guy’s goin down and soon. They knew it when they pulled the policy stuff away from him.
Pass the butter and jam- this guy’s toast.
First – I love the picture; I can only hope we’ll be seeing this for real very soon.
I don’t know about anyone else, but after days of gnashing my teeth and feeling really, really cranky about a lot of what is going on, these latest developments have had me smiling all afternoon.
Wonder how the usual talking twits will spin this…my guess is that only a select few will get it right – that Rove asking to appear in the face of a target letter is NOT indicative of Fitzgerald having a weak case (or no case at all), but that Fitzgerald is now holding the better hand.
Too, too delicious. Can’t wait for the next course, but will happily contemplate the picture of many in the West Wing riding the porcelain bus…wonder how badly Tony Snow feels punk’d?
Tom, thanks for the comment. It appears that a watershed moment in this case was Ashcroft’s recusal, January 2004. Is it possible that Armitage “cooperated” after Ashcroft’s recusal, where Libby, Rove and others did not and that this explains Walton’s ruling?
Here’s Dood’s entire marching band:
When the Frogs . . .
some really great photoshop!
Oh yeah. OT and not OT.
While Chimpy and Cheney and Rover connived against the American people at every turn, the Evil Empire reformed and started taking steroids.
Heckuva job Machiavelli.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/engl.....476403.htm
-GSD
Google “rove” in images. You’ll see that image comes up regularly. It makes me laugh because I wonder how many will see it and not question its veracity.
And just like that, the Averages Joes will beleive that Rove has already been frogmarched like a common crook. And since you know for most folks, that no one is ever arrested, except the guilty ones…
Well, I’m jes sayin’
Viget@ #23 — There was a Raw Story scoop there about Rove & the grand jury a few minutes ago — I saw it, too. Honest — and it wasn’t Leopold’s.
Jane,
You’ll need to correct your post to read “Karl Rove, as we now know, spoke to Robert Novak on Wednesday July 9, 2003″ instead of June 9.
GSD Said “Luskin got the target letter, therefore he can say Rove didn’t get it.
We know your games Goldbars. We are on to you.”
Excellent point GSD - someone needs to ask Luskin whether HE received a target letter. What a duplicitous sack.
Or, why are we indicting Rove for leaking when we are not indicting Armitage?
Yeah, ’cause we all know that you’re not allowed to indict anyone for a crime until you’ve got enough evidence to indict everyone, right? (Even if there were evidence that the accusation against Armitage was more than furious spin from the anti-State Department cabal, that is.)
Actually I’d say if Luskin said Rove hasn’t received a target letter then Rove probably hasn’t received a target letter. But do you know when this is from? Today? A week ago?
GSD at 47-
How do you Luskin got the target letter?
I’m just trying to figure out the technicalities of how that works…
especially since the random poster 3L from two posts back claimed Cheney has received a target letter.
Where does one verify such information?
Please excuse if this has already been explained before and I missed it!
the GJ is out . . . hey kkkarl was smiling!
Karl Rove just got out of the GJ– Pat Fitz also out on the sidewalk. CNN Fitz spoke briefly with reporters. No audio.
It is starting to look real ironic. The one man who may have averted a complete takeover of the nation under guise of false-Messiah Bush is likely the one real true believer, John Ashcroft.
You can say many things about Ashcroft but he did walk the religious talk. It also appears he stood his ground when the country really needed him and then he took a powder when he saw the true caliber of the Bush/Rove power machine.
-GSD
Ooooh you just know it was bad!
Just saw new video of Rove leaving the court house and he was grinning like a loon, trying to show how great it was that he testified again.
I’ll bet he cried AND peed his pants.
From Tom Maguire: FWIW - Karl’s devotees (My job, and it does not pay enough on days like this) will note that a prosecutor’s guidlines urge him to decline to call to the GJ people he is going to indict, especially for perjury/obstruction. Libby, for example, never got a chance to go back after his March 2004 appearances.
1. New grand jury - Fitz met with them only once so far. We may be early in the process.
2. Karl may have flipped, we don’t know.
And “Bonus Spin - the whole Woodward - Mystery Source debacle may have Fitzgerald in a bind. Just why, a curious reporter or grand juror might ask, are we indicting Karl Rove for forgetting a talk with Cooper when we are not indicting someone (Armitage?) for forgetting a talk with Woodward?”
Nice spin, Fitz didn’t indict Libby for “forgetting” but for lying repeatedly to the GJ and the FBI, and for obstruction of justice. And do we know Armitage “forgot” he spoke to Woodward? I think we know Woodward hid it but Armitage could of told the truth from the beginning - that’s why he may have escaped indictment. But lying is no big deal to you guys, is it?
As I stated earlier, I don’t think Rove is singing his heart out. He is not going to rat on Cheney, Libby, or Mr. Nucular.
He appeared before the GJ at his own and Luskin’s request. They asked Fitz for an opportunity to clear his name before the new grand jury and Fitz has to comply. Otherwise, if Turd-boy is indicted, they will cry foul and claim that Fitz did not allow them to clear Turd’s “good name” and that the indictment is a travesty.
The reason they asked for the opportunity to “clear” up the story is because Turd-boy finally got a “target” letter.
I think all other speculation may be a bit off the mark.
I’m getting senile. The story I read was this one:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2....._0213.html
Outed CIA officer was working on Iran, intelligence sources say.
The unmasking of covert CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson by White House officials in 2003 caused significant damage to U.S. national security and its ability to counter nuclear proliferation abroad, RAW STORY has learned.
According to current and former intelligence officials, Plame Wilson, who worked on the clandestine side of the CIA in the Directorate of Operations as a non-official cover (NOC) officer, was part of an operation tracking distribution and acquisition of weapons of mass destruction technology to and from Iran.
Dairymaid 37
Quicky answer–
Target letters are delivered like every other document — usually by fed ex or hand delivered. When I have had a client receive one in a long proceeding, I got a heads up call from the US Attny as well, although that never happens in drug case initial stages.
The real goal of the target letter is to basixcally tell the individual that they will likely be indicted. That has two real consequences — 1) To tell someone if they haven’t already, they should lawyer up and 2) that the US Attny will not loikely request their testimony anymore (or ever) before the gRand Jury because of the yunderstanding that a target always refuses to answer based on their fifth amendment right to remain silent.
OK, lets’ dig a little deeper on that last point. Most respectable US Attorneys do not play the game of getting a suspect in just to plead the fifth just to prejudice the GJ (although AG Thornburgh suggested that and other evil tactics including ignoring represented counsel in plea negotiations — but I digress). Similarly, once a suspect or witness gets a target letter, they almost NEVER AGAIN TESTIFY. Certainly not before the GJ and almost never before a trial jury. There simply, as Christy says above, no odds in favor of helping yourself in that circumstance.
The only time I have ever seen a target testify is as part of a plea negotiation — lesser charges for more and more accurate testimony. These situations in the real world always end up in an indictment of the target on lesser charges followed almost immediately by a guilty plea.
If I was Rove’s attorney, I would be shooting for a bunch of misdemeanors so that Rove could potentially still stay in the whitehouse becasue he was not technically an indicted felon. But to get a deal like that, his testimony would have to be huuge and completely honest. As I once told a client, when you go before the GJ on a plea deal, try to admit every crime you have ever committed starting with stealing change from your parents when you were eight. Because if you hold back or lie to the GJ in that circumstance, you are deadmeat in the world of post-conviction sentencing.
My fantasy is that the deal was worked out, and then Fitz asked a few very unexpected questions to test Rove’s willingness to abide by the deal. Just a likely fantasy at this point….
some drugs can make you grin like a loon…
so can not having any conscience at all…
Timewarp at 49 has a link to Jeralyn’s page. Its a good easy read. I hope she is right about Rove’s squealing for a deal today. Oink Oink.
Are we SURE Rove got a target letter?
How reliable is TruthOut? Please, help me here.
If Rove got a target letter, everybody get some coffee cause I think things may happen pretty fast. Lot’s of things.
Tom - Since your allies over at your blog have raised such a ruckus over the issue of official one, and since my view is that the transcript of the 2-24-06 hearing doesn’t really support the interpretation of the WaPo’s report (and other reports) that has been the prevailing one there, could you point me to the spot in that transcript where Walton actually says what you think he says?
looseheadprop: Thruth Out and Jason Leopold are astoundingly UNreliable.
Anne at 55,
I wish I could share your smile. To my great surprise and for the first time, I could not bring myself to read any of the Rove Grand Jury stories. I have been up and down too much, like the battered spouse who has heard 10 times before that it will never happen again. It will just hurt too much to believe and be disappointed yet again.
I hope, I hope, I hope…
But I just can’t bring myself to believe.
My God. I have LeakGate burnout. So this is what they were trying to achieve!
Assuming that Fitz is on the indictment track and has already delivered a target letter, and assuming that Rove came in on his own volition in a last ditch attempt to clear his name, and further assuming that nothing earthshattering was divulged today that Fitz and the GJ did not already know - how long will it take for Fitz to move forward with the actual indictment?
I am greedy for even thinking this way, but I want an indictment this week.
Imm - I agree. I don’t see any other reason but that he flipped.
Reddhead - Jimmy James was played by Stephen Root. My favorite billionaire of all time. Donkey Business Monkey Wrestling is still my favorite business advice book of all time. I hope A&E, or someone, brings it back.
When Scooter got his target letter, wasn’t it only in the next couple of days when he was indicted?
EPU, I remember that episode!! Great, great humor on that show.
Just on and off listening to the House, Renzi currently blathering about hanging whistleblowers from the dungeon walls.
Neuro, I’m not fully tuned in here, just listening along, it’s been mostly repubs, but John Tierney, MA, did a nice job calling out the pres for obstructing investigations.
xyz–Wouldn’t think it would take long. Fitz would want to analyze the testimony today- and then make sure that the indictment that he already has drafted is perfect- then he’ll ask the GJ to deliver a bill.
Doesn’t seem that it would take long- unless he gets involved in pre-indictment plea bargaining.
Cathy - I don’t recall the target to indictment timeline for libby. I would assume that Fitz would be somewhat predictable in this regard, although the new GJ testimony may change things somewhat.
Anyone remember Libby’s target letter to indictment timeline?
xyz, if, if, if….
there is no reason not to indict immediately, unless there is some part of the plea negotiation that requires a delay — like Fitz requires time to analyze the questions and answers for accuracy and completeness or Rove asked not to be indicted for three weeks in order to settle up his job transfer….
Bill Bennett just said that Valerie was not covert and no damage was done to security. Wolfie is having to argue with him.
The bad news is that Bennett just signed a deal with sirius radio and will be heard by more and more wingnuts spewing lies like that.
lhp, I do not have great faith in Leopold. In my experience he tends to be “loose” with his sources. Occasionally he will appear at FDL or tnh under a pseudonym asking, “did you see the latest Jason Leopold scoop.” With that said, however, he has been “on ” the CIA leak investigation for a long time and takes himself extremely seriously as an investigative journalist. It would be a surprise to me if he were just flat out wrong about the target letter, because he knows how much it would hurt his credibility.
immanentize-
Would they really give Rove that much time to tie up loose ends?
Immanentize 75-
Thanks so much. That was perfect (said in my best Martha Stewart…)
Still not sure if Luskin has said that Rove never got a target letter or merely that Rove is not a target…. which could mean he’s not a target anymore because he has already copped a plea. I just don’t see Rove testifying just to be a good citizen.
Bill Bennett is commenting on the Plame ordeal and trying to give it a blow off.
Donna Brazile is a typical Dem Strategist and doesnt call him on it
Very Sickening
Another picture from the wayback machine
“I’m a source and a target”
xyz, You are not greedy, probably just hungry for some justice for a change like all of us. Christ, a ton of shit should have been exposed before the election, but wasn’t. These guys are rotten and they are ruining our country.
The thought of Rove spinning madly in front of Fitz and the grand jury, without his attorneys allowed to be present, digging himself in deeper, warms my heart.
cathy,
I would give him that amount of time if he flipped — I would get him into the GJ immediately to get his testimony and then (outside of spite) there is really no reason to hurry. He isn’t a flight risk and there are plenty of other fishies’ cases to work on in the meantime.
:~)
I pray!!
well, donna, bill and wolfie all love tony snow. there, i feel better!
“Are we SURE Rove got a target letter?”
When you are dealing with anonymous sourcing, you can never be sure. But I think Leopold’s reporting has been pretty good so far. We’ll just have to wait and see, but I plan on getting a few cases of beer on ice just in case the indictments come down on Friday.
#69- I’m just itching to know what the heck Fitz said. I guess probably not much if past history is a guide. It concerns me that Karl had a grin on his face- he was smiling like that the day Libby got indicted because he knew that at least for the moment he was off the hook. How could it be possible the he’s not getting indicted? It just seems obvious that he lied his ass off over and over and over.
Sorry to be in the wet-blanket brigade. Really!! But there are other reports (on CNN and apparently in Salon) that Luskin is currently proclaiming that Rove is NOT a target. I find it hard to believe that Luskin would be telling flat-out lies…spin, yeah? but absolute non-truths…what does it get him particularly if KKKarl’s head is really on the block?
Hopefully, he’s singing his heart out. BUT…I can’t allow myself to go Fitzophrenic with all this contradictory spin flyin’ around the place.
I wonder if Rove would rat out Bush - after all, remember that joke about Bill and Hillary driving around the backwoods of Arkansas, that ends with Hillary telling Bill if she’d married the guy who pumped their gas, then *that* guy would be president. I gotta wonder if Rove thinks Rove is more important to future electoral success than *Bush* is - and how far he’d go to protect that.
After all, Rove can’t get *Bush* elected president again. If Andrew Sullivan can try to throw Rummy overboard, and if Josh Bolten can do the same with Harriet Miers, then what’s to stop Rove from throwing the “talent” to Fitzgerald to keep himself out of trouble?
This was updated on the USA today link
This update was at the USA Today link just a few minutes ago:
Update at 4 p.m. ET: CNN’s John King just said Rove is still inside the courthouse. Reporters are outside, “staking out†the exits. King said neither Rove nor his lawyer are expected to speak to the media when they depart.
King also said that the lawyer, Luskin, released a statement saying Rove testified voluntarily and that Fitzgerald has not decided whether to bring additional charges in connection with the case.
Sorry if it was posted earlier but I didn’t see it.
OT: Okay, on the Houston story posted at 52, I will tell you that there are almost certainly a number of inaccuracies to the story.
First of all, they won’t pull the plug on April 30th. The few cases where this law has been applied have dragged on for months.
Second, the part about the “lone physician” making the decision is bogus. Someone in her condition will have numerous physicians to begin with, and there will be even more physicians on the hospital ethics committee. The hospital would not have made this move if there wasn’t a broad consensus among her doctors to do so.
Third, doctors HATE going to the ethics committee, and futile care is usually not enough to get them there. In cases like these, the care usually has to be futile AND a number of people on the medical team believe that the patient is in significant pain or distress as a result. In other words, doctors make this kind of move when they feel that they are (a) wasting their time from a medical standpoint and (b) actively torturing their patient in the process. The fact that they are giving her significant amounts of pain medication goes along with this.
Fourth, you can bet your ass that St Luke’s has tried to transfer her to another hospital and failed, for the simple reason that a transfer would be much easier than the media circus that’s now gearing up. But St Luke’s is one of the top hospitals in Texas, so there can’t be many places that would be better for her even if her care wasn’t futile. From the article, we know that she’s a heart patient with a brain bleed who has a tracheostomy, meaning that she’s likely on a ventilator. She will never leave an intensive care unit (ICU).
End rant.
Clearly Rove is going down soon. His reassignment, the new Chief of Staff and Press Secretary are sandbags and plywood being desperately put in place as the storm prepares to make landfall. He’s too arrogant to make a deal, but he’s enough of a creep that he will take Cheney and “Dim-Son” down with him when he goes. Here’s to hoping Fitz hits the tri-fecta.
magnum — re: Rove smiling
This is now a chapter in the corrupt Republican playbook — SMILE WHEN INDICTED.
Think Tom Delay
oddball says:
“Bill Bennett is commenting on the Plame ordeal and trying to give it a blow off.
Donna Brazile is a typical Dem Strategist and doesnt call him on it“
you mean bill ‘the degenerate gambler’ bennett and donna ‘i could not win an election if my life depended on it’ brazile?
oh boy da Cabal News Network is really on top ot it today!!
angie - I guess Bill Bennett never read the Libby indictments: “Joseph Wilson was married to Valerie Plame Wilson (“Valerie Wilsonâ€). At all relevant times from January 1, 2002 through July 2003, Valerie Wilson was employed by the CIA, and her employment status was classified. Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community.”
Guess the CIA asking the Justice Department to investigate was just part of their well-known “war” with the Bush White House, and this entire investigation has been a complete boondoggle. :-0
I can’t believe these people are STILL spewing this nonsense!
mayan,
The question is not whether Rove is a target — matybe he no longer is because he has been indicted?
My opoint is that Luskin is answering a completely useless question. What the press should ask is:
“Has Karl Rove entered into a deal with the United States Attorney? What is that deal?”
If Luskin answered, “Look, Karl continues to cooperate in any way that Mr. Fitzgerald requires” that means he has cut a deal.
Update: Truthout is reporting that sources “knowledgeable about the probe” are saying that Fitzgerald has notified Luskin in a letter that his client is, in fact, a target of the investigation. Outside the federal courthouse in Washington, a spokesman for Rove just told Salon’s Michael Scherer that the report is “utterly false.”
Salon
So what the hell is it? Guess we’ll have to wait to find out.
Imm - But have any of your clients who were actually innocent smiled for a mug shot, or otherwise in the court house (other than after say being found innocent)?
Innoncent people don’t smile, be it mug shots or whatever.