Rove Indicted?

The not-always reliable Jason Leopold of TruthOut set hearts fluttering with his story that Rove has been indicted and Fitzgerald has met with Rove's attorneys to work on a plea deal.

TruthOut helpfully provides a compendium of Mr. Leopold's earlier work on this investigation, so we can see for ourselves how often Rove has been near indictment before.

Let's note that the latest story has already evolved slightly - here is the current lead:

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm representing Karl Rove.

During the course of that meeting, Fitzgerald served attorneys for former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove with an indictment charging the embattled White House official with perjury and lying to investigators related to his role in the CIA leak case, and instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning.

The original report gave Rove "24 hours"; the correction to "24 business hours" was inserted after, well, nothing had happened in 24 hours.  Personally, I have heard folks speak in terms of business days, but never "business hours" - if Federal guidelines require clerical overtime after an eight hour day, does this really mean that Rove has Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday to get ready?  Maybe that will be the next clarification.

And no worries - if nothing happens, no less a reporter than Steven Leser has already stepped up to explain that Mr. Leopold was the innocent dupe of a subtle yet vicious BushCo disinformation campaign.

Meanwhile, Rove spokesperson Mark Corallo has denied this to the NY Sun, Byron York, and (I'll bet) other news outlets who aren't going to dignify the initial report with any coverage. [UPDATE:  Good guess - Jeralyn Merritt runs a forceful denial from Rove spokeman Mark Corallo which includes this:

7.  He has received calls from the major papers on this and denied the story to all of them.]

All that said, I am personally predicting (with 70% probability)  a Rove indictment for this Friday, May 19, with a second guess of Wednesday, May 24.

Fortunately, I have no sources for that.  And as to track record I was OK with my predictions (but erring to pessimism) last fall, when I predicted indictments for Libby and two others, but not Rove.

MORE:  Jeralyn Merritt talks to Jason Leopold (and gets an astonishing rebuttal from Rove's guy Corallo) and articulates my own hunch, which is that Fitzgerald may have been negotiating with Rove's team about a *possible* indictment:

I'm wondering: Did Jason's sources understand the difference between Fitzgerald handing over a copy of the charges he said Rove would be indicted on if he refused the offer Fitz was making and an already voted-on Indictment?

It's hard to believe folks could get that wrong, but that may be the best reconciliation we get, unless someone (or lots of someones) are just making stuff up.

GOOD POINT:  Maybe "instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order" meant that Rove would have to surrender during the next episode of "24".  Boy, if Rove is threatend with missing Jack Bauer in action, he'll turn in a second.

OUCH: Making some stuff up and plagiarizing the rest?  No, not Ben Domenech, but Jason Leopold - Salon tells their story.

UPDATE:  The National Journal Hotline tells us that:

Rove Speaks!

WH DCoS Karl Rove spoke at the American Enterprise Institute this a.m. and to the surprise of some, he took questions. Asked about his role in the CIA leak investigation, he declined to comment, referring the questioner to a statement released by his attorney. Rove: "I have nothing more to add. Nice try, though."

Let's call that a tearful confession, then!  Meanwhile, who has received the statement from the attorney?

MORE:  Details here:

CORN: David Corn from “The Nation Magazine” on a different subject. Scott McClellan told the White House press corps, many who are here today, that he had spoken to you and you were not involved in the CIA leak. Can you explain why the American public, almost two and a half years later, hasn’t been given an explanation and don’t you think it deserves one for that misinformation because it does seem you were to some degree, though maybe disputed, involved in that leak?

 

ROVE: My attorney Mr. Luskin made a statement on April 26th. I refer to you that statement. I have nothing more to add to it. Nice try, though.

MAKING SENSE:  Peter Daou of Salon (Leopold's on-time employer) is spot-on with his skepticism:

My concern - and the reason I write this - is that Leopold's ubiquitous reporting has set expectations very high in the blog community. We're at a moment when blogs are under assault by prominent media and establishment figures. I wouldn't want to see him used as a cudgel to flog the progressive netroots as a bunch of conspiracy nuts. There's enough of that already. We don't need to provide ammo to our opponents.

No worries - like chipmunks, we can find the nuts easily enough already.

Comments

[kim]

Hmmm. Already sensing that the disinformation campaign may be a trap.
=================================

[kim]

Uh, I mean 'vicious disinformation campaign'.
=========================

[richard mcenroe]

Kim — "vicious Partisan disinformation campaign"

[Semanticleo]

"vicious Partisan disinformation campaign"

Is there any other kind?

It would be a bonanza for the Admin., if true,
but has the scent of Karmic residue.

[richard mcenroe]

You FOOLS! Don't you SEE?!

Rove has alreay BEEN IN PRISON for six months! This is the bestest BushCo disinformation campaign EVER, helped along by the fascist toadies at the networks and the NY Times!

[Cecil Turner]

That Leser piece is past hilarious. He starts out by claiming Leopold is always right, and then slaps on the tinfoil beanie:

Assume for a moment that an internal White House investigation was conducted to ferret out those leaking information to Leopold. Once discovered, these individuals would be an excellent avenue with which to discredit Leopold by providing them false information which would then be transferred to the reporter.

He admits he's making some assumptions, but then brings it all together:

Let us take it one step further. Let us assume the White House sat on that information until an opportune moment presented itself. Such an opportune moment presented itself when it became clear that an embarrassing piece of evidence regarding Vice President Cheney was going to be submitted in a filing by Fitzgerald. The administration could provide a tasty bit of disinformation to Leopold’s sources and the attention of the reporter along with a fair amount of the progressive press would be turned to a story that would turn out to be false. This story and the rapid discovery that it was a hoax would overshadow the embarrassing filing by Prosecutor Fitzgerald.

Take notes Mr. Colbert . . . because that's funny.

I have heard folks speak in terms of business days, but never "business hours" . . .

Are we sure he didn't mean until the next 24 episode?

[Clyde]

One of my LLL friends sent me the TruthOut article with a "Haha, told you so." I told her I couldn't find anything about it in the drive-by media or on Drudge, so I would believe it when I saw it. I'm going to love it if Leopold got punk'd. She'd never live that down. Then again, she suffers from constant cognitive dissonance as well as a raging case of BDS. She'd forget about it within days. I, however, would not!

[maryrose]

TM: I disagree, Rove will not be indicted. The fact that the left actually believes Leopold got duped on his story proves this is wishful thinking on their part. If Fitz had the goods he would have indicted months ago.

[Specter]

Asked in the other thread and OT - but where has larwyn been?

[maryrose]

Larwyn has some trouble with allergies and is taking medicine for it.

[Specter]

Thanks maryrose - was just concerned we had not heard from her in a few days. She is a member of the family here.....

[cathyf]

Maybe we should stop teasing her when she "larwyns a thread" After all, she is handicapped both by the fog-inducing meds and the dialup connection from hell.

Nah, giving her a hard time is fun! ;-)

cathy :-)

[danking70]

TM,

You've been throwing that 70% prediction around a while now. How about putting up a bid on Tradespot?

I'm sure Clarice or many others would take the other side.

[Gary Maxwell]

Go read the posts on Talkleft about this. But put down you coffee and swallow first so you dont spill and spew. Its a hoot.

[topsecretk9]

--Nah, giving her a hard time is fun! ;-)--

I think she gets a kick out of Larwyn-ing the thread as much I do. Honestly, I think it is a hoot and love her OT Tank style too.

Larwyn, hope you are felling better!

[jerry]

Rove's on C-SPAN right now, talking at the AEI.

I thought that Merritt article was actually really good.

[Gary Maxwell]

No really Luskin was taking care of his sick cat when this marathon meeting was suppose to have occurred so one of the posters wants to depose the cat or something! I am alternating laughing and shaking my head in disbelief.

Categoric denials = jason's on to something. Maybe they just misposted and meant Jason ON SOMETHING.

[Neo]

This feels like the "high water" moment for a Rove indictment. Unless Fitz totes one out in the next 24 hours, there will be none.

[Chants]

I have confirmed based one multiple, more than two, sources, that patriot Larry Johnson has banned Seixon from sexion.com.

[Cecil Turner]

So Larry really does possess "skills," eh? That dirty so-and-so! Is there any evidence it's a Rovian plot? (And if not, should we invent some?)

[Dwilkers]

What do you think he's going to get indicted on TM? The Cooper convo, obstruction, both or something else entirely?

FWIW I think any Cooper related indictment would be incredibly thin and demonstrate some pretty poor use of prosecutorial discretion.

[topsecretk9]

No really Luskin was taking care of his sick cat when this marathon meeting was suppose to have occurred so one of the posters wants to depose the cat or something!

What?

[Gary Maxwell]

TS

Caravalo or whatever Rove's press spokesman's name is, told Merritt that Luskin was home with hi sick cat. Not good enough to one of her posters. I guess they want to see the kitty litter box and note if the stools are loose or something! The fact that he was not in his office totally escapes them and makes a 15 hour meeting story a larger stool deposit.

[Tom Maguire]

You've been throwing that 70% prediction around a while now. How about putting up a bid on Tradespot?

They quit listing "Rove indicted" after the Mar 31 ran out.

I have no imagination on the indictment - I assume it will be perjury/false statements obstruction on Cooper.

[Patton]

"""""Did Patrick Fitzgerald come to Patton Boggs for 15 hours Friday?
No.
Did he come to Patton Boggs for any period of time Friday?
No.
Did he meet anywhere else with Karl Rove's representatives?
No.
Did he communicate in any way with Karl Rove's representatives?
No.
Did he inform Rove or Rove's representatives that Rove had been indicted?
No.""""""

David Shuster and Chris Mathews would take these answers as confirmation of an indictment.

[Dwilkers]

I just don't see it man.

Cooper admits he doesn't remember and however long it took them to turn over the e-mail they did turn it over and correct. There's as much evidence that Cooper is in error (more actually) as there is that Rove is in error.

Basically Fitz will have to argue that Rove deliberately lied and then willingly turned over the evidence that he was lying - and which presumably he had been lying about creating the obstruction angle - to the prosecutor.

Thin. I mean it is just incredibly thin and "man I just forgot" is way more believable.

[maryrose]

Patton: LOL
Larwyn:
I hope you get well soon, remember 24 tonight!

[maryrose]

Dwilk:
Agreed and besides I thought if you said you forgot you were OK. It worked for Clinton.

[topsecretk9]

Gary

Thanks, got it.

[boris]

I mean it is just incredibly thin and "man I just forgot" is way more believable.

But as long as the fervent guardians of our civil liberties like Jeff and emptywheel approve, Fitz will get away with it.

Conviction isn't necessarily the intent. The new justice is punishment by indictment.

[topsecretk9]

Funny what seems to get lost here, is according to Larry at DU...(now confirmed by TalkLeft)

Joe Wilson is leaking secret GJ info to Larry and Leopold, I wonder how Fitzgerald feels about this?

Anyone got Samborn's email?

[jerry]

Actually Merritt has a subsequent post, that's the one which I think is very good - she talks to Luskin/Rove's spokesman... and he starts waffling about the denials. Turns out he called around to get the denial published, playing catch up with Leopold's sources within Luskin's law firm:

http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014843.html

[paul]

Rove won't be indicted.

If things were going well for Fitz, maybe, but they are not-

a Rove indictment, without guarantee of conviction is career suicide.

[Neo]

Joe Wilson shouldn't know anything but his own experience with the GJ, which means he can talk to his hearts content about it.

[Neo]

I wouldn't call the miffing the direction of the contacts .. waffling about denials.
Sourcing of denials is part of their job, isn't it ?

[topsecretk9]

Neo

I am only taking Larry to heart...and I wonder how Mr. Fitzgerald feels that Mr. Wilson is leaking/and confirming secret GJ information about his case?

Now if Wilson is lying, then it is 2003 Op-ed all over again!

::wink::

Shouldn't we give the the bearer of all things honest the benefit of the doubt?

[Neo]

::wink:: ::wink::

:: know what you mean ::

:: say no more ::

[ed]

Hmmm.

Could someone give Fitz a good swift kick in the rear end? If he's going to indict anybody else, let's get this damn thing done and over with already.

What the hell is he waiting for? The 2008 bloody election? Can he really drag out this stupid indictment nonsense for two more years?

[ed]

Hmmmm.

Someone call up the DOJ and ask who the hell is supposedly supervising this numbnut.

[Bruce Hayden]

I listened to Druge last night on the radio (I was driving, and he was on the 50,000 watt KOA here, so it was one of the only things I could here), and he was almost livid about the supposed Rove indictment. Of course, he gets heated a lot on the air, but this was exceptional even for him.

His sources, which he trusts, were telling him just the opposite, that Rove had not been indicted yet. Then he reminded us about 8 years of imminent Hillary indictments that never materialized.

Later, he did back away a little, and admit that, though he didn't believe that there had been an indictment, he throught that, based on his sources, that it was highly unlikely, but that, yes, it was possible.

[Neo]

What the hell is he waiting for?

Shoot.

I'm still waiting for the the last active Independent Counsel, David Barrett, to release the report on the Henry Cisneros investigation.
After $21 million and finished since August 2004, the "Barrett Report" has reportedly been blocked by Hillary et al who doesn't want to see it made public.

[clarice]

http://www.seixon.com/blog/archives/2006/05/defending_the_s.html Have fun with out own dear Seixon.

[jerry]

Sorry, I'm getting really screwed up about the Talk Left posts. Just go to her site, most all the articles there are really good/responsible.

[Gary Maxwell]

Really Jerry?

Here is the most recent post at talkleft:

Most recent Merritt Post

Anyone see any waffling or noncategoric denials here? What the hell are you smoking and do you share a dealer with Jason?

[Pete]

"What the hell is he waiting for?"

I think he is doing it methodically and the right way. Had he wanted to influence the elections, he could have leaked a lot of politically damaging information before the 2004 elections.

[paul]

"I assume it will be perjury/false statements obstruction on Cooper."

Cooper is weak a witness.

Refusing to give up sources, but then changing his mind. The husband of Mandy Grunwald(daughter of Time editor) former advisor to HRC. Factor in the deceased Time editor, who declared that the information on Plame was not a secret.

The jury will have to decide if Cooper is honest or not, and had something to gain. Perjury is easy if the prosecution witness is unimpeachable. Cooper isn't in this class.

Using Miller against Libby was a piece of (yellow)cake, becuase she is seen as sympathetic to Libby. The same cannot be said for Cooper.

Fitz' delay on the indictment for Rove, if there is to be one, signifies the difficulty in relying on a witness lacking the appearrnace of impartiality.

[cathyf]

I think he is doing it methodically and the right way. Had he wanted to influence the elections, he could have leaked a lot of politically damaging information before the 2004 elections.

*snort* So he releases the politically damaging info before the 2006 elections.

cathy :-)

[pollyusa]

More from Tom Edsall
Washington Post National Political Reporter on "Post Politics Hour"

Miami, Fla.: The blogs are abuzz with reports of Karl Rove's impending (some say actual)indictment. What's the story?

Tom Edsall: I think we will know very soon, perhaps as soon as early afternoon. No guarantee, however.
WaPo 5/15/06

[Neo]

the deceased Time editor, who declared that the information on Plame was not a secret

Did I miss this before ?

[pollyusa]

More from the WaPo

Tom: Is it true that Patrick Fitzgerald met with Karl Rove and his people at Rove's firm of Patton, Boggs over the weekend to try and reach a "deal"? I heard it from reliable sources and also heard that no deal was reached and that Fitzgerald could be indicting Rove as early as today. What have you heard?

Thanks!

Tom Edsall: Jim VandeHei, who has been ahead of his competitors on this story, has been trying to track down every rumor, including the one you cite. We have not been able to confirm the kind of detail you describe.