The NY Times has coverage as well, and they are confused, or confusing:
In his initial testimony to the grand jury, in February 2004, Mr. Rove failed to disclose that he had ever discussed the issue of Valerie Wilson, a C.I.A. operative, with any reporters. Mr. Rove came forward months later to change his story, acknowledging that he had a phone conversation with Matt Cooper of Time Magazine in the summer of 2003 that eventually turned to the subject of Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, Ms. Wilson's husband.
Mr. Rove said he had forgotten the call, one of hundreds he participates in each day. Lawyers for Mr. Rove say he will be exonerated in the case, in part because he volunteered details of his conversation with Mr. Cooper.
Tht Times is focusing on Rove's grand jury testimony but what about Bob Novak? Jane Hamsher has a good round-up of reporting on Karl's early testimony, where he forgot about saying "I heard that, too" to Novak in his initial FBI testimony. That said, if I recall correctly the conventional wisdom is that Rove noted his Novak chat in his first grand jury testimony.
The Anon Lib had a good reprise of the missing Hadley e-mail.
I hope to have more later. As to why this may be a good day for Rove - as I recall, prosecutors are discouraged from bringing to the grand jury folks that have decided to indict, so presumably, a candle is still flickering for Karl.
And don't forget this - how can Karl be indicted but not He Who Must Not Be Named?
It's worth keeping in mind that (very probably) someone leaked to Bob Woodward in June, then again to Bob Novak in July. When queried by investigators, this Unnamed Government Official only mentioned his chat with Novak; it was not until November 2005 that the UGO remembered his leak to Woodward.
So, one might suppose that the UGO is in Dire Do-do, as we Bushies say, since he committed two criminal leaks topped by obstruction of Fitzgerald's investigation.
...[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.
No kidding? Not facing charges? Perhaps a balky grand juror (this grand jury has never met with Karl) is wondering just why the UGO gets a pass while Karl faces indictment. I know I am!
Rick Ballard with MJW tackled the UGO mystery, as did Emptywheel, by studying a redacted court filing. They both lean towards Richard Armitage, then-deputy Secretary of State; I had been pushing that way myself. Among the MSM, Evan Thomas and Mike Isikoff (don't flush this) also fingered Armitage.