Why wasn't Rove indicted for Obstruction and Perjury?

[leveymg]

Almost exactly a year ago, it looked lIke Rove was about to be indicted by Fitzgerald after the U.S. Attorney discovered the existence of an email Rove had sent to then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley after Rove spoke with TIME Magazine's Matt Cooper on July 11, 2003.

Rove did not disclose the existence of the email to Hadley during his first two appearances before the grand jury. Rove had falsely testified that he first heard about Valerie Plame after her identity was disclosed in several news stories. That story was, of course, a complete lie, as Fitz discovered.

"I didn't take the bait," Rove wrote in the email to Hadley immediately following he got off the phone with Cooper. "Matt Cooper called to give me a heads-up that he's got a welfare reform story coming. When he finished his brief heads-up he immediately launched into Niger. Isn't this damaging? Hasn't the president been hurt? I didn't take the bait, but I said if I were him I wouldn't get Time far out in front on this." See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove#Rove.27s_email_t...

How did Fitzgerald learn about that e-mail, and how did Rove retrieve it? Hadley, who was also interviewed by the Plame Grand Jury, might have revealed it and, possibly, produced a copy. Or, else, some other source led Fitz to learn about the message, and Rove may have been forced to belatedly produce a copy from his own records. Finally, perhaps it was "recalled" by Rove after two prior Grand Jury sessions, and was also "overlooked" by the prosecution staff and, aided by Rove, they went back into the e-mails and were finally able to locate it. This latter story, I recall, spread by the MSM, is most unbelievable.

***

Rove was the initial focus of the investigation, and lied to the Grand Jury twice, but was let off by Fitzgerald. Why?

On 13 August 2005 journalist Murray Waas reported that Justice Department and FBI officials had recommended appointing a special prosecutor to the case because they felt that Rove had not been truthful in early interviews, withholding from FBI investigators his conversation with Cooper about Plame and maintaining that he had first learned of Plame's CIA identity from a journalist whose name Rove could not recall.<39>

Following the revelations in the Libby indictment, sixteen former CIA and military intelligence officials urged President Bush to suspend Karl Rove's security clearance for his part in outing CIA officer Valerie Plame.<40> Ibid.

On June 13, 2006, Rove's attorney announced that he had received a letter from from Fitz informing him Karl would not be indicted. The public was forced to drawn our own conclusions about what the prosecution's reasoning was. Many hoped that Rove had cut a deal and delivered the goods against one or more White House figures. But, after Libby was convicted, Fitzgerald indicated that that he didn't intend to pursue others.

After learning that Rove was intimately involved in the decisions to improperly dismiss U.S. Attorneys, and that five million White House e-mails were "lost", questions about why Rove wasn't indicted for withholding his e-mail in the Plame case arise again.

Why wasn't Rove indicted for Obstruction in withholding his e-mail from investigators, and perjury for lieing about this to the Grand Jury? Why haven't there been additional indictments, and will justice be served?

[H2O Man]

1. Nominated.

A very good question: why wasn't he charged? I'm hoping the Wilsons' civil case, and/or a serious congressional investigation, would allow the public to know what happened behind closed doors.

[acmavm]

2. Interesting. It would seem that Fitzpatrick would have a little 'splainin'

to do...

[Robbien]

18. CREW is asking Fitzpatrick to reopen the case

CREW asked Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to re-open his investigation of Karl Rove's role in disclosing Valerie Plame Wilson's status as a covert CIA operative in light of recent revelations about missing White House email.

We base this request on three key factors: 1) revelations that Karl Rove uses a Republican National Committee (RNC) email account for 95 percent of his communications; 2) the admission from the RNC's counsel that all of Mr. Rove's emails prior to 2005 have been destroyed; and 3) the acknowledgment today from White House spokesperson Dana Perino that – as CREW reported yesterday – five million emails are missing from the White House servers.

All of this raises serious questions about whether Mr. Rove knowingly destroyed evidence relevant to the Special Counsel's inquiry and whether Mr. Fitzgerald received all relevant documents.


more . . .

http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/27633

[tomp]

3. secrecy in gov't is going to kill us. nt

[hootinholler]

58. I disagree... It will enslave us.

If it hasn't already. The slavery will kill us.

-Hoot

[tomp]

80. i didn't mean it literally.

we are already at least partially enslaved.

secrecy is already literally killing some of us.

i meant secrecy is going to be the death even our few remaining freedoms.

[Demeter]

4. Because Rove Went Back and Changed His Testimony At the 11th Hour, 59th minute

and so Fitz and the Grand Jury couldn't charge him.

[leveymg]

5. Yes, he changed his testimony. But, what did he finally disclose that

was sufficient cause for Fitz to let him off the hook for his previous lies?

[H2O Man]

6. There was the

V. Novak story, and it resulted in Mr. Fitzgerald's decision in October of '05 not to indict Rove. Her memory of the conversation with Luskin was not good enough to nail down exactly when it took place.

What I think you are focusing on, and what is of great significance, is what took place in the spring of '06?

[leveymg]

8. Yes, I want to know why Fitz didn't pursue others.

Please refresh our memory about how V. Novak may have helped Rove avoid indictment. That part was never really clear to me.

[H2O Man]

10. Here is a start:

(I'll look for more information this morning. There was a TIME article in December '05 that I think was interesting. I'm having difficulty finding it. But this essay by David Corn is good.)

From Corn's blog, 12-3-05:

I have solved the Not-So-Great Mystery of the Second Novak--at least in part.

As readers of the item below and regular followers of the CIA leak case know, the latest bounce involves Time magazine reporter Viveca Novak, who has been called to testify by special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald about conversations she had with Robert Luskin, Karl Rove's lawyer, long after Rove participated in leaking the CIA identity of Joseph Wilson's wife to columnist Bob Novak (who is unrelated to Viveca Novak). Luskin, according to sources close to Viveca Novak, was a longtime source of hers, not a close friend (as has been wrongly reported). Media reports have noted that during at least one of their talks, Viveca Novak said to Luskin that Rove might have told Time's Matt Cooper (prior to the leak that appeared in Bob Novak's column) that Valerie Wilson worked at the CIA.

Why does this matter? It seems that Luskin is pointing to his conversation with Viveca Novak to back up Rove's defense against the charge that he purposefully misled the FBI and Fitzgerald's grand jury by initially not telling them about his conversation with Cooper. In a later grand jury appearance, Rove did acknowledge he told Cooper that Joseph Wilson's wife was employed at the CIA. The question for Fitzgerald has been whether Rove first tried to hide this information from his investigation.

Luskin apparently is claiming that Rove had forgotten about his conversation with Cooper but that once Viveca Novak told Luskin about the Rove-Cooper connection Rove then requested a White House records search that produced an email that supposedly refreshed his memory of this talk with Cooper. Consequently, Rove reappeared before the grand jury and disclosed this conversation. In this Rove-friendly account, the Luskin-Novak conversation provides an exculpatory explanation for the discovery of an email that led Rove to change his story before the grand jury. As I noted yesterday, it would be a rather odd twist if Novak, an accomplished public interest-minded investigative reporter for years, offers evidence that helps keep Rove indictment-free. And the accounts so far have made it seem that Novak may have done something untoward by either speaking out of school about a colleague's source or by actively trying to assist Luskin and Rove.

Now, according to completely trustworthy sources close to Viveca Novak, this is what happened. Novak wasn't trying to tip off Luskin or to help him. During a conversation, Luskin said to Viveca Novak that Rove had never spoken to Cooper about Valerie Wilson. Novak instinctively pushed back, in the way many a reporter would challenge a source whom he or she believes is spinning or lying. "She assumed that Luskin was giving her BS," one close-to-Novak source says. "And she replied with something along the lines of, 'This is not what I hear.' She assumed that Luskin did know about the Rove-Cooper conversation and that she was not telling him anything he did not already know."

....


http://www.davidcorn.com/archives/2005/12/what_happened_b.php

[H2O Man]

12. More:

WhatViveca Novak told Fitzgerald
by V. Novak
TIME 12-12-05


It was in the midst of another Washington scandal, almost a decade ago, that I got to know Bob Luskin. He represented Mark Middleton, a minor figure in the Democratic campaign-finance scandals of 1996. Luskin kept Middleton out of the spotlight and never told me much. Still, there is the occasional source with whom one becomes friendly, and eventually Luskin was in that group.

We'd occasionally meet for a drink--he didn't like having lunch--at Café Deluxe on Wisconsin Avenue, near the National Cathedral and on my route home. In October 2003, as we each made our way through a glass of wine, he asked me what I was working on. I told him I was trying to get a handle on the Valerie Plame leak investigation. "Well," he said, "you're sitting next to Karl Rove's lawyer." I was genuinely surprised, since Luskin's liberal sympathies were no secret, and here he was representing the man known to many Democrats as the other side's Evil Genius.

I began spending a little more time than usual with Luskin as I tried to keep track of the investigation. But how it all bought me a ticket to testify under oath to special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald still floors me.

The week of Oct. 24, 2005, was Indictment Week--that Friday, the grand jury's term would expire, and it was expected that Fitzgerald would finish up his probe by then so he wouldn't have to start working with a new grand jury. It seemed clear that Scooter Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was in deep trouble, but Rove's status was uncertain. Sometime during that week, Luskin, who was talking at length with Fitzgerald, phoned me and said he had disclosed to Fitzgerald the content of a conversation he and I had had at Café Deluxe more than a year earlier and that Fitzgerald might want to talk to me.

.....


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1139820-1,00.html

[H2O Man]

14. Also see:

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 29, 2005; Page A01

The reporter for Time magazine who recently agreed to testify in the CIA leak case is central to White House senior adviser Karl Rove's effort to fend off an indictment in the two-year-old investigation, according to two people familiar with the situation.

Viveca Novak, who has written intermittently about the leak case for Time, has been asked to provide sworn testimony to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald in the next few weeks after Rove attorney Robert Luskin told Fitzgerald about a conversation he had with her, the two sources said.

It's not clear why Luskin believes Novak's deposition could help Rove, President Bush's deputy chief of staff, who remains under investigation into whether he provided false statements in the case. But a person familiar with the matter said Luskin cited his conversations with Novak in persuading Fitzgerald not to indict Rove in late October, when the prosecutor brought perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges against Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

"This is what caused to hold off on charging" Rove, the source said. But another person familiar with the conversations said they did not appear to significantly alter the case.

.....



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/28/AR2005112801683.html

[L. Coyote]

69. There is something fishy in Wash. D.C., and it is not the Potomac.

How does this fit with 5 million missing e-mails?

Given: "once Viveca Novak told Luskin about the Rove-Cooper connection Rove then requested a White House records search that produced an email that supposedly refreshed his memory of this talk with Cooper. Consequently, Rove reappeared before the grand jury and disclosed this conversation. In this Rove-friendly account, the Luskin-Novak conversation provides an exculpatory explanation for the discovery of an email that led Rove to change his story before the grand jury...."

Explaining away the 5 million missing e-mails may be complicated by the past history on record, including Rove's purported e-mail search.

This thread cross-posted and recommended at:

Years of OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE E-MAILS go missing. Five Million E-Mails Lost??
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x649088

[Garbo 2004]

48. Also Adam Levine was revisited in the week before Libby's indictment.

Another Rove email and conversation this time with Levine right after his conversation with Cooper where Rove doesn't mention his conversation with Cooper. This was the dog that didn't bark, according to Luskin/Rove, because the Cooper conversation wasn't important to Rove. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9865842/site/newsweek/

But Rove did email Hadley after the Cooper conversation to mention it. And Rove's characterization of the Cooper conversation was false. (A CYA move for Rove that was necessary with Hadley but not Levine?) Recall Hadley reportedly was out of the loop in summer 2003 when the VP told Libby to leak portions of the still publicly classified Iraq NIE. Hadley was pursuing the normal procedure for NIE declassification and reportedly wasn't told about the plan to selectively leak portions to reporters.

So Rove contemporaneously mentions the Cooper conversation to Hadley but not to Levine and both are "evidence" according to Luskin/Rove that the Cooper conversation was no big deal in Rove's mind and he didn't intentionally mean to obstruct the investigation? Didn't make sense to me then or now.

And yes, we've been wondering, what did happen in Spring 2006? Did Rove indeed sweeten the pot? But if so, it would appear it only may have been of use to Fitz if Libby decided to flip, which so far he has not.

[NNN0LHI]

7. Because Fitzgerald knew Bush would just pardon him and Libby if he did

Fitzgerald kept this case open for a reason.

Don

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

9. As I recall...

...Libby is in jail, so that doesn't make any sense.

[NNN0LHI]

11. Libby is not in jail n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

16. Sorry. Was convicted, and is going to jail. n/t

[NNN0LHI]

19. He will go to jail if Bush doesn't pardon him first

But if Bush pardons Libby, Fitzgerald could still indict Rove after Bush is out of office and out of the position to pardon him. Rove knows this too. I bet he doesn't sleep well at night thinking about it either.

That is what I was trying to say.

Don

[3waygeek]

22. * could issue blanket pardons

just like his Daddy did for Weinberger and the rest of the Iran-Contra crowd.

[NNN0LHI]

24. Bush can't pardon himself

If Bush pardons all of his minions they no longer have a 5th-amendment shield against being compelled to testify against him.

Bush can't be indicted while in office, but he would leave himself with the potential of being indicted after he leaves office. He couldn't count on the next president who is not likely to be a Republican to give him a pardon either.

So Bush is kind of in a fix.

Don

[tritsofme]

50. While it would certainly be unprecedented

I don't see any wording in the Constitution that would preclude Bush from pardoning himself.

What I'm less sure about is whether a pardon needs to be made public or disclosed at the time it is issued. Could Bush pardon himself, or anyone for that matter, have it notarized and keep it in his pocket until needed?

[bananarepublican]

77. Could Bush pre-emptively pardon Cheney, then resign the Presidency...

... so that Cheney, as the new 'Commander in Chief' was then in a position to pardon Bush?

This may seem to be a stupid question, but I am very ignorant of the technicalities surrounding pardons etc.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

28. This makes no sense in the context of your argument.

Maybe I've got you wrong, but it sounds like you're saying that he didn't prosecute Rove because Bush would pardon him.

First of all:

1) No prosecutor worth anything would fail to bring an indictment for that reason.

2) He already indicted and got a conviction on Libby, whose chances of being pardoned by Bush are only slightly less than Rove's.

Sorry, I just think it's a bunk argument.

[lovuian]

62. Fitz exposed the Whitehouse shenanigans of the Iraq Lie

the Lie to going to war

but one wonders what more goodies are in those emails

because remember David Kelly another exposer of the Iraq War and the last one to talk to Judith Miller
and yet Fitz never asked her about Kelly...and it was pretty obvious that miller on the stand was peeing her pants

Espionage Espionage Espionage

that was brought up

we have a group in the white house with a secret email system which was under the control of ROVE and there fore Bush

not the FBI
Not the CIa
Not the Pentagon

its own email system

and yet Fitz let this go under the radar screen???

Hatch Act is there for a reason

we are talking about a serious situation at time of war where spies were running around and People dying at unexpected times

[Garbo 2004]

65. 1. No, the Iraq war lies were exposed independently of Fitzgerald's investigation.

The Iraq lies were already unraveling before Plame's identity was leaked. Fitzgerald's investigation itself had no role in that. Info was already available prior to the investigation and more subsequent to the commencement of the investigation, entirely independently of the investigation.

2, The DOJ investigation was not about the war or how we came to be there. That was outside of the scope of the investigation Fitzgerald was authorized to undertake.

Judith Miller's testimony was only sought regarding her conversations with Libby regarding Valerie Wilson because that was relevant to the investigation into the leak of Wilson's CIA identity and the case against Libby. David Kelly was not. Neither was Chalabi or a host of other individuals and subjects.

[lovuian]

73. I'm sorry I thought the case was about Motive why Bush & friends

wanted to Smear Wilson because he exposed the Lie about the Niger documents that were forged by Italy
did Fitz go there???

Guess I'm wrong
I thought the MOTIVE was protecting the Lie about Iraq WMD

I'm so confused forgive me

and thats why it was necessary to Out Plame and her Company Brewster & Jennings and why Kelly was killed

I wonder if Fitz would have had Kelly testify
if he was alive maybe

All coulds and maybes
the past is past
Libby is the villain and jail it will be
case closed
(Rove & Cheney walk away smiling)

[Garbo 2004]

74. The IAEA had declared the Niger docs a fraud in March 2003. Months

before the Plame leak. The lies were already falling apart and would continue to do so.

July 6, 2003: Joe Wilson published his op ed in NYT. July 7, 2003: Condi Rice said the intel for the Niger claims was shaky and the claims should not have been in the State of the Union speech.

Fitzgerald was investigating whether or not a crime had been committed by an unauthorized disclosure of Valerie Wilson's CIA identity and if so, to prosecute. Fitzgerald also was authorized to investigate and prosecute any Federal crimes committed during the course of the investigation with the intent to interfere with or impede with the investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, etc.

Fitzgerald wasn't investigating the Niger docs, the WMD claims, the war. David Kelly alive would not have been involved in the Plame leak investigation, neither was Tony Blair, the IAEA or any of that.

[enough]

13. Good question. R#5.

[madokie]

15. several years ago I worked with a guy who was into the drug scene pretty heavily

and our boss was good friends with one of the detectives and one day he asked the detective why they haven't busted him, you guys have to know what he's doing, the detective said he is worth more to us on the outside. so maybe that thinking is some of why turdblossom is not behind bars today, just a thought.

[radfringe]

17. see

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x652584

[BeFree]

20. We can be sure...Right?

That there were no threats or political maneuvers that had any bearing on indictments. They wouldn't do that.

Maybe Rove is innocent - ever thought of that? Rove as an innocent little bystander - imagine that.

*************

If there is no conspiracy to keep Justice's scales tipped, then there must be a bigger, more sure investigation underway?

'Course, in two years a Dem president, wishing for bipartisanship, will dismiss the whole affair for the good of the country, ala Clinton and Iran/Contra.

*****************

Has Fitz actually quit?

[mmonk]

21. I think Fitz lined it up for Congress to do something.

I think overall, our system is severely corrupted so we have to wait for the final chapters to be written to know if we and the constitution will be protected.

[Skidmore]

23. Because Rove slow roasted Scooter on a spit with an apple in his mouth

and served him up on a platter surrounded with veggies and sprigs of fresh herbs. A culinary delight. Scooter, the other white meat.

[H2O Man]

25. Important discussion ...

I hope this thread keeps going strong.

[Me.]

26. The Answer Was Supplied By Fitzgerald Himself

When he spoke of sand being kicked in the face of the umpire. When you have a case where you are dependant upon the testimony of witnesses, if the witnesses won't give up the goods, as in the case of I Liar and Cheney, end of story. The rest, newspaper notations and all, is circumstantial, and easily refuted by a defense attorney as it depends on interpretation. Further, I am reminded of Fitzgerald's strategy in other cases of squeezing from the bottom up. But until a witness gives up the goods he cannot go forward. There is a good reason the Liar's supporters have been begging for a pardon and that is because, first and foremost, they are Cheney supporters,

As has been pointed out in this thread, Fitzgerald left a trail of breadcrumbs for Congress to follow if they can ever summon the will to do so. He has done his job and unless, Liar gives it up, or someone can definitively prove that Rove deliberately deleted emails about the Plame case, it is all conjecture. We may smell a rat but unless we can trap the rat, the rat will remain in the house.

[librechik]

27. when I saw "leveymg" I got excited

Love your posts!

Thanks for the insight!

Patrick Fitzgerald's behavior at times over the years has been perplexing. He seems to have esoteric ties to very deep interests in the counter intelligence, counter terrorism world. There is an issue with a detainee he supposedly has kept in seclusion or witness protection mode which some 9/11 Truth types are outraged over and call him a liar.

I'm not well enough versed in the details to add clarity to the issue, and in my experience have found Fitzgerald's prosecutorial moves flawless. But in the libby case at a certain point the air got sucked out of Fitzgerald's balloon. It looked exactly like he had gotten an order to lay off that he couldn't ignore. But I don't know, and doubt we ever will know.

[H2O Man]

32. Yes.

I always read "leveymg's" works on DU. He is one of the leaders on the Plame-related discussions on DU, and he always makes me think. In the past 24 hours, he has posted two of the most important threads on DU in months.

Mr. Fitzgerald was picked in December 2003 by James Comey in large part because of his grasp of national intelligence matters. A good number of people who do no subscribe to the 9/11 MIHOP or LIHOP theories also have concerns about some of his beliefs on some intelligence-related issues. It's important to be able to disagree with him (or others) on intelligence issue, legal matters regarding "suspects' rights," and even the way he prosecuted the Plame case, without automatically assigning him to a role as part of the master conspiracy run by the Bush administration -- and I want to be clear that I am not saying you are in any way doing that. But a few people on DU seem to be doing just that.

[librechik]

34. thanks, H2O Man

it just occurs to me that all the hero worship of Fitz around here needs to be leavened with a little reasonable scepticism. We want reality, not the polarized hero/demonizing that is so easy to fall into in human discourse.

BTW,IMHO, it's not a conspiracy, it's a movement. ;)

[H2O Man]

36. The Bush administration?

I assume you are implying that they are a specific type of movement.

[librechik]

51. we are being challenged by a radical fundamentalist movement

involving extreme Christian beliefs and Federalist Society mumbo jumbo. A lot of people scoff at this idea as a conspiracy theory, but it is much larger and less intelligent than a conspiracy. Instead it seems to be a lot of more or less disorganized people who believe in the same philosophy, thus they don't have to literally conspire to bring about changes that they all desire. They work independently, but taken together the influence on society is significant.

Anyway, it's just a wisecrack I use when I;m chided for being a conspiracy theorist.

[bleever]

29. Are there more than two possible explanations?

Either A) Rove provided some assistance to the prosecution, or B) Rove provided plausible explanations for his omissions and "mis-statements", so that Fitz didn't feel the evidence wasn't sufficient to secure a conviction.

We know that Rove coughed up 250 previously "missing" emails. They helped explain his supposed forgetfulness and then recall of the Cooper conversation.

And we've suspected that Rove had somehow managed to shift the blame to Libby and the OVP behind the scenes, in addition to his public use of the WH to issue denials of his involvement.

And it could be a combination of the two explanations.

My money is on A).

[H2O Man]

30. I agree.

I would point out that it has been reported Rove assisted in providing the large sum of e-mails. There is not a public record of the e-mails. The only things that we can say that we know are those things that have become part of the public record, by the pre-trial documents and trial record.

Some of what has been reported regarding Rove comes from his attorney, both directly and indirectly. I would suggest that Mr. Luskin's word is not "good as gold."

I would also think that a combination of A) and B) is a distinct possibility.

[bleever]

31. Reviewing the story of the 250 pages of email

takes us back to an article by Larisa on Raw Story on March 26, 2006:

According to several Pentagon sources close to Rove and others familiar with the inquiry, Bush's senior adviser tipped off Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to information that led to the recent "discovery" of 250 pages of missing email from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney.
...

While these sources did not provide any details regarding what type of arrangements Rove's attorney Robert Luskin may have made with the special prosecutor's office, if any, they were able to provide some information regarding what Rove imparted to Fitzgerald's team. The individuals declined to go on the record out of concern for their jobs.

According to one source close to the case, Rove is providing information on deleted emails, erased hard drives and other types of obstruction by staff and other officials in the Vice President's office. Pentagon sources close to Rove confirmed this account.

None would name the staffers and/or officials whom Rove is providing information about. They did, however, explain that the White House computer system has "real time backup" servers and that while emails were deleted from computers, they were still retrievable from the backup system. By providing the dates and recipient information of the deleted emails, sources say, Rove was able to chart a path for Fitzgerald directly into the office of the Vice President.

...

Asked about allegations that Rove is providing Fitzgerald's office with key information and if his status had changed as a result, Luskin provided a vehement denial.

"Your story is false and utterly without foundation," he said. "There has never been any discussion of any deal of any kind involving Mr. Rove. His cooperation has at all times been voluntary and unconditional."

One of the sources close to the investigation said he was not surprised by Luskin's response.

"That would be difficult for Rove to admit," the source said. "I think Rove is now considered a special cooperating witness."

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Roves_cooperation_seen_to_advance_inquiry_0327.html

Some of these details jump out at me in a way they hadn't before. For starters, the mention of Pentagon sources close to Rove. Also, how deeply Rove dug in order to produce stuff implicating the OVP. Very interesting.

[H2O Man]

33. Right.

It is always good to keep in mind what Joseph Wilson wrote in his book, about how Rove blamed Libby and Cheney for the problems the Plame scandal was causing for the president. He noted that there was serious tension between the Office of the President and the OVP as a result of this.

[EFerrari]

35. And if we think about that tension, it was tension between

the Office of the Resident and the OVP/Pentagon with CIA (Tenet) trying to find a place to land in the melee.

In other words, there were significant and immediate consequences of those "tensions" that amount, imho, to a foreign policy coup for the OVP which had captured the Pentagram by default.

Not sure if that makes sense.

[H2O Man]

37. Yes.

It makes sense. You are correct.

The CIA is approximately 15% of the national intelligence community. The majority of the rest is through the military. That played a significant role in this. The OSP was able to exploit Tenet's weaknesses as a director of the Agency.

[EFerrari]

38. Tenet was a hired hand where Cheney was a mentor. Tenet was toast

from the get go, looking back.

I can only imagine how furious the intelligence community has been these long years for being made to assume responsibility for the Cheney/Wolfowitz/Feith disasters.

The secondary (although equally important) damage is what these machinations have meant as they ripple out into our culture. There is an al Jazeera cameraman that has been held at Gitmo for four years now. He is on a hunger strike along with about 20 others. Their forced feeding is also a form of torture. And there is no bubble over Gitmo that will contain the mentality that could issue such orders against innocent people. It will come home, most likely has already as we may notice with whole families of undocumented workers being held in Southwestern jails with no hope of due process. And that's not to mention the vegans, the Quakers and peace grannies who have been the objects of FISA violating surveillance.

While the OVP has tried to dominate policy at any cost, human rights and social justice have been degraded across the board. It all seems so contaminating. If we fight "them" over there, we will violate "their" rights -- our rights -- over here as well.

:(


/ack

[Patsy Stone]

42. Imagine the joy

when the CIA and/or Pentagon discovered Cheney was coming to visit -- AGAIN. I'm sure they busted out the donuts and coffee.

:hi:

[EFerrari]

43. Maybe if we hide all the batteries, he'll go away.

:scared:

[H2O Man]

45. Think of how

improper it was for VP Cheney, Scooter Libby, and Newt Gingrich to go to pressure analysts.

[EFerrari]

47. Yes, of course. If you can prevent someone from doing their job

your pet project has a better chance of eluding scrutiny.

:mad:

[Patsy Stone]

49. There's never

a microwave oven around when you need one.

[H2O Man]

44. I think it can

be best understood -- perhaps only understood -- in the context of the "shadow government" that sources including Senator Robert Byrd spoke of .... on 9/11, VP Dick Cheney made the plans that Rumsfeld and he had worked on for decades operative. Let's take a quick look at some information from pages 78-79 of Byrd's book "Losing America":

"Only hours after the September 11 attacks, the administration installed a 'shadow government' of about a hundred senior executive branch officials to live and work secretly outside Washington at two East Coast locations, reportedly run from the White House. White House chief of staff Andrew Card directs the shadow government from the White House, where he is immune from giving testimony to Congress (have we heard this before?). The shadow government is supposed to assume command of the government in case of a national emergency. Of course, this shadow government consists of one branch only, the executive branch.

"This shadow government was created under the authority of the 'continuity of operations' plans left over from the Cold War and executive orders issued by President Ronald Reagan. However, the Congress has not sanctioned the shadow government, nor were members of Congress even made aware of its existence until the story leaked in March 2002. This shadow government has been described as an 'indefinite precaution,' which can mean anything. While a few newspaper stories appeared in March 2002, very little new information has been reported since then. The shadow government is presumed to continue its operation outside of congressional oversight."

The shadow government had its own intelligence operations: we know them as the OSP, though there were other cells. The Plame scandal was only one of their operations .... another was the neoconservative/AIPAC espionage scandal. I think it is fair to say that many of the people who have honorably served this nation in intelligence positions are outraged at what has happened since 2000.

[EFerrari]

46. And the "shadow government" has as its goal

perpetuating itself and nothing else.

There's something that recoils at the idea and / but then there is the daily behavior we witness.

Ray Mcgovern and others formerly in the intelligence community deserve all the support we can hike them.

1974 can't hold a candle to 2007.

[mmonk]

54. Yes, but like a vampire, the light of day can destroy it.

Someone or some party must step up and be that light of day.

[EFerrari]

55. That's probably us because political parties don't like to take risks.

I don't blame them.

But that means, we have to step up, get off the coach, out of our comfort zone. I'm not liking it but, too bad. I also eat spinach. :)

[mmonk]

56. Spinach is ok as long as you have the right dressing.

Yeah, I guess I'll keep writing letters and making phone calls though I'd like to just get back to normalcy.

[EFerrari]

57. I know. "Red Alert" gets stressful and we've been in it for years.

:(

:hug:

[lovuian]

64. They assasinated David Kelly and outed Plame

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkuEtYQOFpY

Its all smoke screen but remember Judith Miller was the last one he talked too before he died

[bobthedrummer]

52. Yep. The infrastructure was put in place for decades esp. WWII-Cold War era.

[L. Coyote]

70. Do not ignore NSA, the Prez's own intelligence org. n/t

[bobthedrummer]

39. Criminal thinking makes sense to criminals, you can take that to the bank. eom

[EFerrari]

41. Yes and what I'm trying to understand are the unintended consequences

that these criminals brought on themselves (and on us) because criminals aren't known for their ability to rationally think through their actions to consequences -- either for themselves or others.

There are ripples from the power struggle between the Office of the Resident and the OVP that shook out all over us -- including the people who drowned in NOLA because the White House decided not to share the fact that they knew the levees were breeched and then, didn't warn anyone, including the Hurricane Center. Did Bush care? Cheney?

We all SAW what happened. Just as they mounted no defense on 9/11, the Gulf Coast was left like a baby in a trash can. (And these are the muthers that call themselves patriots and public servants. Right.)

This misAdministration has always been about power and the manipulations by power -- image -- and never about actually GOVERNING. They can't "look bad" so they withheld the fact that the levees were breached and we still don't know how many Americans died as a result.

They are murderers, true sociopaths who don't even notice the lives they end.

[Garbo 2004]

59. I wondered about "Pentagon sources close to Rove" when I first saw that report last year.

The Pentagon had been taken over by the Rummy-Cheney cabal. It seemed odd to me that it would be Pentagon sources that would be close to Rove that would be knowledgable of his discussions with investigators and speaking to the media.

It just seemed on surface an unlikely placement for sources close to Rove. No doubt there were folks at the Pentagon not kindly disposed toward the VP's office but also close to Rove? With so much disinformation swirling about and given to the media, it just puzzled me. (Yes, I know it's under Larisa's byline.)

[H2O Man]

61. I agree.

The Pentagon isn't Rove's neighborhood.

[lovuian]

63. Remember Miller was giving carte blanche in the military

to look for weapons of mass destruction

Miller could be a Rove agent or a Cheney agent

part of the underground shadow group infiltrating and taking over all agencies of America

Fitz had to be aware of it

[Patsy Stone]

40. Because he spilled what he had.

He helped get Scooter (no skin off his nose), and he kept the President out of it (his main goal). His motives are neither mysterious nor unexpected. He's a loyal coward.

What I never understood, and maybe it's now explained by the RNC servers, is how those 250 e-mails went unnoticed to begin with. That's a long shot, isn't it? That's a lot of e-mails to "misplace", no?

[Garbo 2004]

53. Except any evidence which may have provided by Rove seemed conspicuous by its absence

in the Libby case. Libby's own notes, files, testimony, OVP docs and testimony of others nailed Libby. I don't recall offhand at least that any of the info or testimony that was used in the trial surfaced after Libby's indictment.

Fitzgerald kept Rove out of the Libby case. Was it because he simply didn't need his testimony? Rove gave him nothing useful? Or if Rove had given him anything, it would complicate and widen a case Fitzgerald wanted to keep narrow and focused on the charges? If he used Rove he would have had to turn over Rove's testimony to Libby's team. Still, Libby's defense sought the Rove file, testimony etc. but Walton shut them down.

Fitzgerald seemed to keep a number of things back from the Libby case, Libby's conversation with Edelmann for example. If Fitzgerald already had Libby nailed on the charges without Rove, what could Rove offer him if he did offer him anything?

Maybe it's as it might seem on the banal surface, Rove just tap danced enough to persuade Fitzgerald that a jury might have reasonable doubt on perjury charges. Or maybe Rove was helpful but only for further charges that required Libby to flip to make a bullet proof case against someone else. Just speculation.

[Patsy Stone]

71. I think your idea of not wanting to widen a narrow case

is correct, although I have no proof. Fitz' whole thing was about keeping this as focused as possible. He didn't charge Robert Novak or Richard Armitage with revealing Plame's name, and they came right out and admitted it, so how could he charge Karl if the whole situation was simply "forgotten" until revealed to the GJ? (Whether or not it really was "forgotten").

Maybe Rove finally came clean with the "missing" emails/hard drives after the Viveca questioning, and that was that. There was proof that Rove talked to Cooper, but as you say, not a clear enough case for Fitz to make, or not serving any purpose but the proverbial witch hunt. After all, the Cooper charge was the weakest, and the one for which the jury acquitted Libby.

I think he confirmed Fitz' suspicions, filled in a missing blank here and there and only did that when he absolutely had to. I'm sure putting himself in the middle of all this was not his first choice, and he went to the GJ five times to prove how much he tried to conceal his role in it. I agree that if Viveca and Luskin's talk never came to light, the case against Libby wouldn't have changed.

Did Rove give Fitz more in that path to the e-mails, or other testimony about other things Fitz chose not to use? Maybe. I'd sure like to know, but I realize I may go to the grave wondering.

I was just thinking aloud in that post (and I'm not sure it was ever fully answered even at the time) why there were all of these e-mails/hard drives which didn't come to light until after Luskin helped Fitz find Viveca? Didn't Fitz request all communications about Plame? So, the question is, how did Luskin know to have Rove search for them (he said he did, IIRC) and where were they that Karl knew of 250 of them missing from the OVP? Why didn't they appear before, giving Karl the chance to wriggle out of this two or three GJ appearances earlier?

[Garbo 2004]

75. A few things....

First, what could Novak be charged with? We have no Official Secrets Act that covers journalists. Novak may well have cooked up a cover story with Rove for Rove's part in the leak, but without either one admitting to it, there would be no grounds for a charge of lying to investigators, etc.

Armitage revealed his conversation with Novak at the beginning of the investigation. Fitz apparently found no indication that he realized that he was outing a covert CIA operative or intended to do so.

Rove was an altogether different case in terms of info he provided and didn't provide investigators, grand jury. I don't think Rove was on the hook necessarily for leaking, would have to show that he knew of Plame's classified or covert status. He may not have known. But lying and perjury was another matter. Rove actively leaked the info about Wilson's wife to Cooper. Libby hadn't. Libby just confirmed what Rove had told Cooper, that he'd heard that too. A tag team act.

Emails, timelines:

It's confusing with all the emails at different times, but reportedly Luskin provided the Rove-Hadley email to Fitzgerald in October 2004. Not entirely clear why it wasn't turned over before with other docs. Accounts differ. Wrong "search terms" were used initially, was one explanation.

In late Oct 2005 Luskin offered up his 2004 conversations with Viveca Novak where at one point Luskin learned that Rove had been a source for Cooper, which is what Rove had previously denied (and if Viveca knew that, who else knew, Luskin must have thought in 2004). Luskin explained that's when he went back and got Rove to search for any emails that would document a conversation with Cooper which turned up the email to Hadley that had previously been overlooked. Supposedly that showed that Rove simply forgot, didn't intenionally lie about not talking to Cooper and they searched and turned over evidence when they learned that Rove's previous memory was "mistaken." Well, that's Luskin's story. (Although IIRC Rove was still at least publicly maintaining he wasn't Cooper's source until shortly before Cooper was forced to testify in July 2005 and the info was leaking out of Time mag anyway.)

Also in late Oct 2005 Adam Levine was dragged in it yet again to again confirm to investigators that Rove didn't mention a conversation with Cooper, although they spoke shortly after Rove had spoken to Cooper. This to show that see, Rove didn't think the Cooper conversation was important, he didn't even mention it to Levine, a WH media communications guy. (But it was important enough to email Hadley?)

The 250 pages of WH/OVP emails were turned over to Fitzgerald around Feb 2006, weeks after Fitzgerald said he had learned that not all emails had been preserved and turned over. These emails reportedly had not been archived in the "normal process" (how, why?) but had been recovered somehow. Not a lot of info on that.

It gives me a headache. Since Rove's "amnesia" to investigators in October 2003 and the grand jury in Feb 2004 is not credible no matter how many rabbits or emails Luskin pulled out of his hat. But maybe it was enough for Fitz to think a jury might think there was reasonable doubt. I don't know. Oy.

[Patsy Stone]

81. More for the headache machine from Marcy

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/04/roves_hadley_em.html

Here's one important detail from Hubris that helps up pinpoint how Rove came to have that email.

A hard copy of the Hadley-Rove e-mail turned over to Fitzgerald (which was independently obtained by the authors) showed that it had been printed out of Rove's White House computer on November 25, 2003. One of Rove's assistant's, B.J. Goergen, had searched the computer that day at the request of Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin. (377-8)

<snip>

The Rove-Hadley Email Wasn't on the RNC Server
We know that because Rob Kelner just explained to Henry Waxman that: the RNC has apparently destroyed all e-mail records from the White House from 2001, 2002, and 2003.

<snip>

The Rove-Hadley Email Wasn't on Normal WH Servers
But neither could the email have been on the normal WH servers. That's because, if it had been on the normal WH server, just about any search they would have used (including Cooper, or Niger) would have returned the email when they did the search at the beginning of October. So we know they weren't on the regular WH server.

Which means this email must be among the 5 million emails destroyed.

--

And thanks as always for the clarification.

[antigop]

66. About those 250 pages of e-mails.. do we know if they came off the RNC servers?

Sorry, this may have been answered and I missed it.

[lovuian]

60. Fitz does have explaining to do

Right now It appears that Rove had quite a ARMY with blackberries and computers using a server of the RNC

He's had them from the get go

Fitz has to explain why he didn't tell Rove sir you are in violation of the Hatch Act
its pretty obvious he was

I can understand he was dealing with the Plame case
but to prosecute Libby then go and Prosecute Rove for the Hatch Act violation was his next step

and yet he never did

Letting Rove off only to see Rove fire all his colleagues and give him a undistinguishable rating

Rove got his revenge..You don't come to close to taking Rove to jail and not have repercussions
Rove had his revenge on Fitz and believe me Fitz was to be fired on the next round

Libby was right he was sacrificed so Rove & Cheney got off

Fitz was warned by Dean your a Special Counsel you there to investigate and prosecute

Do your job and let know suprises pop up

obviously a surprise popped up


Fitz has alot of explaining to so ...sand in the eyes or did he cave to the pressure of the Whitehouse
cause it looks like he gave the Plames their conviction but one must wonder

at the ESPIONAGE

A man outs our CIA agent and has a secret communication network in the whitehouse under no agency watchdogs

Heaven knows whats in those emails and there were Israeli spies working in agencies close to Rove

And may I remind others we are at war

Yes Fitz has some explaining but

heres where Fitz maybe the Hero of the day
did he let Rove go for this moment where he got the whole army of fools and their master

He knew they would hang themselves and his last statement of leaving the door open could be just that and he said it with a smile

[Garbo 2004]

67. Ok, I'll play for a bit. What were the violations of the Hatch Act with which

you say Rove should have been charged? Are Executive Office staff exempt from some strictures of the Hatch Act, such as engaging in political activities on the job?

Which gov't agency ordinarily investigates and pursues violations of the Hatch Act? What kinds of penalties are there?

The real problem at issue here with the use of not just RNC servers but also third party email systems (such yahoo, etc.) by WH staff is what? Hatch Act or something else?

[H2O Man]

68. I'll get in on this, too.

What might people think Mr. Fitzgerald owes them an explanation of? I think that it is important that those who say he owes this to tell us how he gets around the laws regarding grand jury investigations, which limit him to discussing those he indicts, but not others. Without such detail, I think the "Fitzgerald owes ___" posts are cheap shots.

[lovuian]

72. Oh now getting testy Cheap shots Fitz is a employee of

the American people

they pay his salary who does he answer to? Gonzales? He answers to the people(thats you and me we pay his paycheck) and their elected officials
I remember Fitzgerald being called in and asked questions by Congress about the Plame case and was he under oath ?

Guess thats who he needs to explain too...Congress and the people
just like the Congress asked Kyle Sampson did you suggest Fitzgerald was to be fired

Congress will be investigating and who knows Fitz well could have put them on the trail


I'm not expecting anything out of Fitz all he has to do is the job of Justice and the constitution and its laws

if he does that then he is going to be just fine

Cheap shots thats me

The Hatch act if I'm mistaken was violated when Rove deleted the emails Fitz told him he shouldn't

I'm not a lawyer just asking the questions Its a free country or is it?

Oh and Libby has asked for an appeal Fitz maybe asked by the Judges about the case and might have to explain
about did he know about the Rove army communications system

thats if Libby does get his appeal

Appeals are brought when people feel that there was some error made
Even the court system recognizes no one is perfect and mistakes are made
Thank Goodness we have such a system
Last time I checked Fitz didn't walk on water and he is human

lets all remember that

Sorry No Cheap shot intended on Untouchable Fitzgerald

[Garbo 2004]

76. Do you ever check the factual accuracy of your statements? Is there anything

prohibiting you from doing so?

You remember Fitzgerald appearing before Congress on the Plame matter? If you're thinking of Waxman's hearing, while Fitzgerald was invited to discuss the Plame matter, he referred the Committee to information already public record in the Libby case and did not meet with Committee staff or testify.

You keep saying Fitzgerald has a lot of explaining to do. Do you understand he's legally constrained by the secrecy of the grand jury investigation? Do you understand that the point is he's legally not supposed to reveal what hasn't already been made public in the Libby indictment and prosecution? So he can't simply readily "explain" what you think he should.

It's not the same situation as the AG and his staff being called by Congress to account for its firing of US Attorneys. They aren't legally constrained from disclosing that information.

And you are mistaken about the Hatch Act and what constitutes violations of the Hatch Act.

[EST]

78. Perhaps you are confusing the Hatch act, actually there were

more than one "Hatch" act, and the presidential records act.

The "Hatch" act that we are most concerned about has to do with using government facilities, property, equipment, personnel and time to pursue political activitios, rather than government business.

The presidential records act (ca. 1978, I think) says all records having to do with official activities have to be retained. IOW, no twenty nine garbage trucks backed up the the wh door, picking up load after load of shredded documents.

[H2O Man]

79. You recall Mr. Fitzgerald

"being called in and asked questions by Congress about the Plame case and he was under oath"? You really do remember that? Please provide a single source that documents that.

Mr. Libby's legal team will appeal his convictions for lying to FBI investigators and to the grand jury. Appeals are based upon potential errors in the trial: these would include if the judge allowed the prosecution to bring something into the trial that violates Libby's rights; refused to allow the defense to admit evidence that they had the right to allow in; and, in some cases, evidence that fits the Bradley rules. I'm assuming you think the e-mail business would fit under Brady; please explain how that would fit in any meaningful way a defense of Libby's lying to the FBI and grand jury?

It might also be of interest to you to review what the law says about what a prosecutor can say to either the public or Congress about information gathered in a grand jury investigation. I'd recommend two sources: first, the transcript of Mr. Fitzgerald's press conference on the day that Libby was indicted; and second, the letter he sent explaining why he could not, in fact, testify to Congress.