Regarding Rove (Plame Scandal)

There is a bit of excitement over Sidney Blumenthal's fantastic article "Libby and the White House book club" (3-8-07), which can be found in two DU:GD threads. The article stands on its own. Enjoy it.

However, there is some confusion found on the DU threads. Sidney notes that Karl Rove escaped indictment, due to some funny business with a TIME reporter, Viveca Novak, and Rove's attorney, Robert "Good as Gold" Luskin.

DUers who have read the Plame Threads should remember that this took place in October of 2005. That was when Libby was indicted, and Rove almost was.

Sidney is not implying that this was part of the May, 2006 controversy when TruthOut reported that Rove was indicted.

I am not commenting on the accuracy of the T.O. article. I'm merely noting that the 10-05 and 5-06 issues should not be confused.

:toast:

Strange days, indeed.

I hear you. I know exactly what you mean.

Thank you for clearing that up.:thumbsup:

People will remember that the NY Times had articles the day Libby was indicted, that noted Mr. Fitzgerald had been seen near Luskin's office. And then in December, TIME had a one-page article on the issue, before Ms. Novak packed her bags.

The case is long and complicated. There are attempts by the necroconservatives to distract, disrupt, and confuse the issues. Blumenthal's article -- which is very powerful -- is the type of thing that those from the dark side do not want to be focused upon for the correct reasons.

Thanks. Am linking the Blumenthal article. Interesting that the night before the verdict, * had dinner at Rove's house.

Libby and the White House book club

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/03/08/scooter_libby/index.html

on this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x368081

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x368126

when taking in all of the aspects of the investigation, all of the facts, all of the analysis and all of the implications towards Rove in all of this, it starts to add up more and more to the point of likelihood that Rove was absolutely in danger and at some point cut some sort of deal to avoid the indictment.

After taking everything in that we've learned over the years in regards to Plame, I can't think for a second that Rove simply wasn't charged because he simply was innocent. It is so much more logically likely that Rove wasn't indicted because Fitz held that indictment over his head in some sort of deal that Rove cut.

That's why to this day I think there was absolutely some legitimacy to Jason's article though I fear the true facts of the matter may in fact never see the light of day, thereby keeping Jason from ever fully being vindicated.

As always thank you for your voice of clarity.

I have e-mailed Marc Ash with these links in hopes that he or Jason might reply to all or one of them...kp

think there is any need for either one to respond. The Blumenthal article has nothing to do with the TruthOut issue.

I imagine they will also agree with you...kp

It's easy enough to go back to when Libby was indicted, and read articles about how Rove "escaped." Ms Novak's role can be found by simply reading through TIME's coverage, or the Hardball transcripts from early December of '05. This had nothing to do with the May '06 controversy.

:)

Still wanting to see him frogmarched, rather than eating quail wings

pleasure in his being deposed in the Wilson's civil suit.

that "Gold Bar" Bob was deposable. He set himself up for this by testifying in front of the GJ, didn't he?

Could be very entertaining.

there are several good reasons to call Karl Rove in from of the Waxman committee, to discuss how he handled sensitive information. And I think Goldie Luskin should be testifying, too.

:hi:

Like VP Cheney, Luskin had priorities and obligations.

But it would be fine if he was impeached first.