David Corn Online
 

October 06, 2005

Rove in (Deeper) Trouble?

How interesting. According to the Associated Press (see below), Karl Rove has asked to return to the Plame/CIA leak grand jury and testify some more. Now why would he do this if he had been forthright and expansive with the grand jury during his three previous visits to its chambers? Perhaps he just remembered something. After all, he is a busy man. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, told AP, "I can say categorically that Karl has not received a target letter from the special counsel. The special counsel has confirmed that he has not made any charging decisions in respect to Karl." Well, maybe. Remember, when Rove was last in the news about this scandal, Luskin initially claimed that Rove never had mentioned Valerie Wilson (nee Plame) to a reporter. Then it turned out--whaddayaknow!--Rove had mentioned Valerie Wilson (though not by name) to several reporters.

What a good week for Rove to hit trouble. The Miers nomination is a dog (though the White House may yet pull it out of the pound). Bush's Big Speech on terrorism (see below) is likely to do nothing to help his prospects. (Pollster John Zogby told me today that the public--notwithstanding any change on the ground in Iraq--has made its mind on Iraq: the war was not worth it.) John McCain cleaned Bush's clock on the anti-torture provision in the Senate. And now Rove has to go running back to the grand jury. No doubt, to "clear up" previous testimony. But if he and his attorney were not worried about Pat Fitzgerald's investigation and the possibility of an indictment, would he do so? Isn't it about time for Republicans and White House to start smearing Fitzgerald as a partisan hack? Here are excerpts from the AP account:

Federal prosecutors have accepted an offer from presidential adviser Karl Rove to give 11th hour testimony in the case of a CIA officer's leaked identity but have warned they cannot guarantee he won't be indicted, according to people directly familiar with the investigation.

The persons, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy, said Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has not made any decision yet on whether to file criminal charges against the longtime confidant of President Bush or others.

The U.S. attorney's manual requires prosecutors not to bring witnesses before a grand jury if there is a possibility of future criminal charges unless they are notified in advance that their grand jury testimony can be used against them in a later indictment.

Rove has already made at least three grand jury appearances and his return at this late stage in the investigation is unusual.

The prosecutor did not give Rove similar warnings before his earlier grand jury appearances.

Rove offered in July to return to the grand jury for additional testimony and Fitzgerald accepted that offer Friday after taking grand jury testimony from the formerly jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller.

Before accepting the offer, Fitzgerald sent correspondence to Rove's legal team making clear that there was no guarantee he wouldn't be indicted at a later point as required by the rules.

Posted by David Corn at October 6, 2005 06:14 PM

Comments

1

Gee ya think he is guilty and starting to crawfish? Yep, this little weasel is going to get put in the slammer and good riddance, now to get the rest of this crime gang in there with him, along with shrub and the darth cheney. Wonderful let's see how they handle this one. Maybe another terrorist attack, oops looks like the new york subway has several non specific but credible threats. Sure is convenient. think some dork at the WH made an anonymous call? Can't trust this crowd for anything but more of the same, still justice might happen again in the country if we are lucky, and they don't all get presidential pardons from the doofus in charge. Getting better.

Posted by: What the F**k at October 6, 2005 06:30 PM

2

Wishful thinking. Rove is untouchable. Dick Cheney would go to jail before Karl Rove would. Bush will just pardon him or have Fitzgerald's pets mutilated on his doorstep to put him in his place. Rove is untouchable. He knows way too much.

Bob in North Dakota

Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at October 6, 2005 06:31 PM

3

Wishful thinking. Rove is untouchable. Dick Cheney would go to jail before Karl Rove would. Bush will just pardon him. Rove is untouchable. He knows way too much.

Bob in North Dakota

Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at October 6, 2005 06:32 PM

4

Sorry, I tried to edit the part out about the mutilated pets.

Bob

Posted by: Bob at October 6, 2005 06:33 PM

5

I don't know Bob in ND, remember when Ehrlichman and Haldeman were "untouchable" because they knew too much? They were the twin pillars of invincibility in the Nixon WH. Then...

In April 1973, Nixon forced H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman to resign. John Dean, refused to go and was sacked. Dean issued a statement making it clear that he was unwilling to be a scapegoat in the Watergate case. When Dean testified on before the Senate Committee investigating Watergate, he claimed that Richard Nixon participated in the cover-up.

But back to General Rove's troubles...I think it's kind of interesting that first he claimed to have nothing to do with the Plame/Wilson/outing matter. Fatfuc..oh excuse me... Scott McClellan even went as far as to say the President KNEW Rove was not involved. So...now today Rove has MORE to tell the Grand Jury??

This is old stuff at this point, but...(1) Rove must have lied to bush and the grand jury by claiming he was not involved as we now know he was. Or (2) was Rove truthful with the grand jury and bush and the pResident lied to the public and committed an act of obstruction of justice?? As this thing plays out the potential for criminal behavior seems to be expanding not just to include Rove but potentially all the way up the chain of command to the president. Maybe, could be? The federal conspiracy statutes that eventually brought down the Nixon administration could come into play here as well.

Oh, and what about George Stephanopolous' remark about his sources? Had to be from in the WH, I'd think. Would that person(s) be the "John Dean" in this?

Twisting in the wind?

Posted by: micki at October 6, 2005 07:02 PM

6

These creatures will continue on until they have outlived their usefulness. Clinton outlived his, and so will bushco. God help us with what comes next.

Posted by: Saladin at October 6, 2005 07:43 PM

7

Mr. David Corn,

I am sure he just has something to add.

I have said it before, the pardons are already written. Consider how much this WH cares what anybody thinks? Add control of the MSM and they will just do as they please, polls and opposition be damned. (neocons think that shows resolve)

It would still be very cool to see the slug squirm as the sweat from his upper lying lip fogs up his glasses.

It is really very cool to hear he is squirming enough already to feel the need to clarify his testimony.

Maybe Miller let one fly that put him in check?

I truly hope that indictment are handed down. It might be all for not but a necessary exercise just the same.

They might have stolen our institutions and government but they have yet to really steal the heart and soul of America (at least not from many on this blog! HA). Maybe some good will come from the process, it would be a challenge to make things any worse.


Thanks

Kirk

Posted by: capt at October 6, 2005 07:57 PM

8

On another note...go to The New Republic and read "Welcome to the Hackocracy" -- Harriet Miers wins the #1 Hack Slot

tnr.com

Posted by: micki at October 6, 2005 08:04 PM

9

Saladin...maybe, just maybe, they HAVE outlived their usefulness. All of them!

Posted by: micki at October 6, 2005 08:05 PM

10

Keep up the heat, Mr. Corn, cracks are beginning to form. Let's wedge some good, old-fashioned civil discontent into them and get the REAL press to hammer it home.

Burn, Karl, burn. *dances around effigy*

Posted by: goob at October 6, 2005 08:06 PM

11

Saladin, not Dennis Hastert!

The Bush family has spent 100 years gathering this much power. Of course, there are those who would think of them as food fish, and cut bait.

Looks like Bush was right, we are going to get to the bottom of this. One thing about concentrating this many republicans under one roof. They have been known to eat their own.

And Micki, beside the conspiracy statute that brought down Nixon's house of cards, there is the obstruction of justice that tried to bring down Clinton's.

Out of the whole Bushco Gang, I'd like to see McClellan swing first, then Rove, then Cheney... not that I have a list or anything. No longer will they be welcome in the house of Saud, they are a disgrace.

Even in Mexico, Fox will say "Mi casa, no mas si casa. No mas Arbusto."

Posted by: geof01 at October 6, 2005 08:08 PM

12

Bush said God told him to invade: report


October 7, 2005 - 9:33AM


A BBC program says US President George W Bush has claimed he was instructed by God to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.

The claim comes from the first meeting between the US leader, Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, and his then foreign minister in June 2003.

The ministers told the BBC Bush also said he'd been told by God to create a Palestinian state.

The BBC plans to broadcast the programs Israel and the Arabs: Elusive Peace in Britain over three Mondays starting next week.

*****end of clip*****

This insane tyrant in our WH scares me. If God is speaking to him I can only conclude God lied about the WMDÕ³.

If you lived in the middle east you could very well join this "holy" war to defend yourself from a crazy man that thinks God tells him to invade other countries.


capt

Posted by: capt at October 6, 2005 08:10 PM

13

goob, burn Karl burn! I love it. Burn Karl Burn! Burn Karl Burn!

Stand back folks cause nothing smells as rank as a burning Turd Blossom.

This guy will turn in the boss to save his own neck. He got shit canned by 41 once and I'm sure that deep down he hasn't forgotten.

Burn Karl Burn! This really reminds me of the 60's.

Posted by: geof01 at October 6, 2005 08:14 PM

14

capt., given the choice between who lied, God or GWB, I give God the doubt on this one. That story is the wierdest one I've read on the POTUS.

I haven't read the story on Harriet MyEars being born again. I hear thats a trip. Anyone got a link?

Posted by: geof01 at October 6, 2005 08:18 PM

15

Does it seem to anyone else, that this administration is falling apart...looking more ridiculous and desperate every day? I really think that they are falling apart.


Bob in North Dakota

Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at October 6, 2005 08:41 PM

16

Karl,
Just out of curiousity, when did you begin to think you were above the law? Now, there is also the issue of voting in Kerr Country where you have never been seen and where you have a chicken coop for a house. If that's your residence then what do you call that well decorated shack in Washington D.C.

Posted by: Jeanne at October 6, 2005 08:54 PM

Posted by: Jeanne at October 6, 2005 08:58 PM

18

David, There's some mixed stories out there that may or may not mean much. It appears that Fitzgerald asked Rove to testify, not the other way around. Apparently, Rove's "offer" to testify was in July. Fitzy is just now taking him up on it. So it's a little less damning than it appeared at first. But still, me-thinks unkie karl is in trouble.

Posted by: Mike at October 6, 2005 09:00 PM

19

David, There's some mixed stories out there that may or may not mean much. It appears that Fitzgerald asked Rove to testify, not the other way around. Apparently, Rove's "offer" to testify was in July. Fitzy is just now taking him up on it. So it's a little less damning than it appeared at first. But still, me-thinks unkie karl is in trouble.

Posted by: Mike at October 6, 2005 09:01 PM

20

Bob in North Dakota - YES.

and Jeanne - two republicans walk into a bar on Halloween Eve. One is dressed like a snake and one like a gator. The bartender says, we'll have none of that in here....

Posted by: geof01 at October 6, 2005 09:02 PM

21

Yep, I am with you Bob.

It is still a little too little and a little too late. The wheels can fall off but anything short of impeachment and Bunnypants will still be taking orders from Cheney. Impeach Bunnypants and it is a Cheney administration AND he could run in '08.

It would take a complete purge on the hill and that is not in the works.

*sigh*


capt

Posted by: capt at October 6, 2005 09:04 PM

22

Rove to testify before CIA investigation grand jury

By Holly Yeager
aand Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington
Published: October 7 2005


John Siffert, a white-collar-crime attorney with Lankler, Siffert & Wohl who is not involved in the case, said one reason a witness might request to re-appear before the grand jury would be to recant previous testimony.

Recantation may help a witness avoid an indictment on perjury charges or, if the witness is indicted, could make it difficult for a jury to find that the defendant acted "wilfully" when he offered false testimony, Mr Siffert added.

*****end of clip*****

If it is "recantation" it would follow that Rove wants to recant so the testimony would be of his volition, if Fitzgerald wanted more testimony it might have been an invitation.

I think the heat is high and Kkkarl wants to recant a lie. WeÕll see.

Either way it makes things seem a bit darker for Kkkarl.

I would not be bowled over if Fitzgerald comes away and says "Well Rove cleared that up and no crime was committed" or some such thing.

capt

Posted by: capt at October 6, 2005 09:18 PM

23

#11 -- I heard that Ari Fleischer will be indicted. Well, sheeeeeeet, if he's indicted, I see him squealing. Is he on your list?

He hi-tailed it out, but maybe not soon enough.

Posted by: micki at October 6, 2005 09:24 PM

24

David, at this point if you were a Democrat in the senate, do you vote for Miers?

Posted by: Christopher at October 6, 2005 09:36 PM

25

Pardons will not happen. Count on it. Anything like that would effectively destroy 60 - 70% of republicans runnining in 2006, and throw both houses back into the hands of democrats who would then have full subpoena power to do as they wished. That's something uncle Dick cannot abide. Much more likely is that they'll try to pull an Iran Contra. The day the indictments come out, Gonzalez (if he isn't implicated in some way) will crawl out in front of the podium just like Ed Meese did in 1986 (or was it 85), and explain the somehow mistakes were made and that we're all over it, and the wrongdoers have been forcibly removed from the premises, the president is shocked, shocked. And by the way, did you know this Fitzgerald character has a coke problem?

Posted by: bling at October 6, 2005 09:36 PM

26

Bling wrote:

>Pardons will not happen. Count on it.

Why? Clinton used them unethically, and there were no consequences.

I maintain that Rove in untouchable. He has been the chimp's trainer for too long. He knows enough to get Bush impeached. He knows enough to put him in jail. He knows the location of every skeleton-bearing closet. Cheney and Rumsfeld would go to jail before Rove. Bush would sign a pardon in a nanosecond, if the alternative was Rove telling all. Count on it.


Bob in North Dakota

Posted by: Bob in North Dakota at October 6, 2005 09:53 PM

27

I don't know. I think Fritzgerald added all the years up and put the number in front of Karl and Karl began to shake. The old come to Jesus moment.

Here's a prosecutors take. "It's always risky to go before a grand jury," Grieve adds. "You can't take your lawyer into the room with you. It's especially risky if you've already testified once -- or, in the case of Rove, three times -- before: The odds of introducing inconsistencies into your testimony increase each time you give it. That's why, the former prosecutor tells us, a defense lawyer would advise his client to make a return appearance before the grand jury 'only in extremis."

Federal prosecutor tells Salon: Rove must believe he may be indicted

Posted by: Jeanne at October 6, 2005 10:51 PM

28

Rove to testify before CIA investigation grand jury

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - Presidential confidant Karl Rove will testify for a fourth time before the federal grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA officer's identity even though prosecutors have warned they can no longer guarantee he will escape indictment, lawyers said Thursday.

Rove's offer was accepted by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald in the last week as the grand jury's wraps up its work and decides whether Rove, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby or any other presidential aides should face criminal charges.

Rove's lawyer said Thursday that Fitzgerald has assured him that he has made no decisions yet on charges and that his client has not received a so-called target letter, usually the last step before a grand jury indictment.

"I can say categorically that Karl has not received a target letter from the special counsel," attorney Robert Luskin said. "The special counsel has confirmed that he has not made any charging decisions in respect to Karl."

Luskin said that Rove "continues to be cooperative voluntarily" with the investigation but that he could not further discuss his dealings with Fitzgerald's office.

However, several people directly familiar with the investigation told The Associated Press that Fitzgerald sent a letter accepting Rove's offer to testify but warning prosecutors could no longer guarantee the presidential aide wouldn't be indicted.

Rove offered in July to return to the grand jury, and Fitzgerald accepted that offer last Friday after taking grand jury testimony from the formerly jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller, the people said, speaking only on condition of anonymity because of grand jury secrecy.

*****end of clip*****

The 11th hour play to prevent an indictment?

Mountain Man: I'm gonna make you squeal like a pig. Weeeeeeee!

Bobby: Weee!

Mountain Man: Weeeeeeee!

Bobby: Weee!

HA!

capt

Posted by: capt at October 6, 2005 11:47 PM

29

If only I could have faith that justice has anything to do wih this. I want someone to name even one politician, who, after being caught red-handed, actually suffered any real consequences, like prison time. They may be out there but I can't recall, please remind me, it may restore my faith.
Hajji, I want to thank you for the recommendation of the movie "Crash." I haven't cried so much over a movie since I saw " The Life of David Gale." My only thought at the end was, "what is wrong with us?" I don't know if there is a devil or if it is genetic, I have no proof of either, but there is really something wrong on planet Earth, that much is evident.

Posted by: Saladin at October 7, 2005 12:49 AM

30

geof01 - here you go -
Harriet Miers Born Again

Posted by: James Ha at October 7, 2005 10:43 AM

31

Mr. Corn

I tolerated your convoluted ditribe of small mindedness and name calling, but most of all it was just boring. People like yourself talk to much and say absolutly nothing. That is why I a conservative. I BELIEVE. I BELIEVE in MY Country and for what it stands for. I BELIEVE in the AMERICAN people and for what they stand for, except for you, I don't believe in you. I BELIEVE in capitalism and what that it has give us the greatest standard of living in history. But most importantly I BELIEVE IN AN ALMIGHTY GOD and you can never take that away from us.

Randy Sweet

Posted by: Randy Sweet at October 11, 2005 05:15 PM