More On Rove’s Fate
Raw Story reports that Fitzgerald wasn’t particularly enamored with Rove’s last minute testimony. But what does that mean?
A few weeks after he took over the investigation into the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson in early 2004, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald had already become suspicious that Karl Rove and Vice President Cheneyâ€™s then-chief of staff I. Lewis â€œScooterâ€? Libby were hindering his investigation.
In late January 2004, Fitzgerald sent a letter to his boss, then acting Attorney General James Comey, seeking confirmation that he had the authority to investigate and prosecute individuals for additional crimes, including obstruction of justice, perjury, and destroying evidence. The leak investigation had been centered up to that point on an obscure law making it a felony for any government official to knowingly disclose the identity of an undercover CIA officer.
Comey responded to Fitzgerald in writing Feb. 6, 2004, confirming that Fitzgerald had the authority to prosecute those crimes, including â€œperjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.â€?
Fitzgerald was concerned that Rove had hidden or destroyed evidence, lawyers close to the case tell RAW STORY. His suspicions may have been right: an email he sent to then Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley in early July 2003 later proved Rove had spoken to Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper about Plameâ€”a fact that Rove omitted when he was first interviewed by the FBI.
What does this mean in the long run? Well, it appears as if Fitzgerald is still looking to indict Rove.
Short of a last minute intervention by Roveâ€™s attorney, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is expected to ask a grand jury investigating the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson to indict Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove for making false statements to the FBI and Justice Department investigators in October 2003, lawyers close to the case say.
Rove failed to tell investigators at the time that he had spoken about Plame to Time Magazine reporter Matthew Cooper and conservative columnist Robert Novak, both of whom later cooperated in the case. Novak outed Plame in a July 14, 2003 column.
The Chicago prosecutor briefed the second grand jury investigating the outing last week for more than three hours. During that time, he brought them up to speed on the latest developments involving Rove and at least one other White House official, the sources said. The attorneys refused to identify the second person.
As of Monday, neither Rove nor his attorney Robert Luskin has explained Roveâ€™s misstatements to Fitzgeraldâ€™s satisfaction, those familiar with the case said. Eleventh-hour testimony from Time Magazine reporter Viveca Novakâ€”who Roveâ€™s attorney Robert Luskin fingered as a crucial witness in keeping his client out of courtâ€”does not appear to have been helpful in dodging an indictment, they added.
Ouch. This could spell another PR nightmare for the Bush Administration.
My advice Mr. Bush? Clean house. Otherwise you’re going to be living with this nonsense until the end of your presidency. And as a nation we have to move on, so the time to take action is now.