Rove Recollecting
By Denise Best | Related entries in In The News, The Plame GameWell, it has been a while since we’ve heard about Rove and Plamegate, so …
There have been rumors flying around Washington in the last few days that Karl Rove, the president’s top political adviser, might soon be indicted in the CIA leak investigation.
At least for now, the rumors appear to be based on someone hearing that someone else had heard something, or that someone had gotten a sense that something was about to happen and told someone else. Are there any facts to back up such gossip and guessing?
Well, it wouldn’t be Washington without gossip!
Rove has appeared before Fitzgerald’s grand jury four times. Before that, he was interviewed once by FBI agents assigned to the investigation. The problem, if there is one, apparently involves the first two appearances â€â€? the FBI interview and the first grand jury testimony. In both those instances, apparently, Rove did not tell investigators about his conversation with Cooper.
By the time Rove appeared for a second time before the grand jury, he had discovered evidence � an internal White House e-mail � showing that he did indeed talk to Cooper. He gave the evidence to Fitzgerald, who then questioned him about it at length.
Rove is thought to have testified that he simply did not remember the Cooper conversation â€â€? Cooper himself described the talk as being about two minutes long and occurring right as Rove was leaving on vacation â€â€? until he discovered the e-mail. Supporting Rove’s contention is the fact that Rove, apparently, testified from the very beginning that he talked to columnist Robert Novak, which suggests he was not trying to hide his involvement in the case from Fitzgerald.
As far as anyone outside the investigation knows, Fitzgerald does not have a problem with testimony from Rove’s second, third, and fourth appearances before the grand jury. In addition, it appears that Rove, like Libby, would not be charged with violating any of the underlying laws in the case â€â€? either the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or the Espionage Act.
So for now, the agonizing question for Rove’s supporters is whether Fitzgerald believes Rove’s earlier testimony involving Cooper constituted the crimes of making false statements (in the case of the FBI interview) or perjury (in the grand jury testimony).
Now, how many of you would remember (an appreciable amount of time later) details of a two-minute conversation that occurred right before you were leaving for vacation?
This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 14th, 2005 and is filed under In The News, The Plame Game. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:24 pm
If Rove lied to Scott McClellen about his conversation with Novak and/or Cooper why is it so hard to believe he lied to the FBI about it?
December 14th, 2005 at 5:18 pm
Events and circumstances that are important to a person are always remembered.
Being angry at and smearing somebody trying to expose the lies and half truths of the administration’s case for war would be something not easily forgotten by the perpetrator.
Many non important details about conversations will be forgotten if one is asked to recall them months later.
For these guys, angry at Wilson, their smear campaign was very important and difficult to forget, even months after. Rove is lying and hopefully will get what is coming to him. Indictment(s) for perjury and/or making false statements.
December 15th, 2005 at 8:52 am
[...] Donklephant asks the questions - how many of us would remember a two minute conversation before you left for vacation? I’m not sure if they’re being facetious or not. [...]
December 15th, 2005 at 9:08 am
And speaking of gossip, I read somewhere that he asked his secretary to remove the phone log of the call. That would make it hard to forget.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:20 pm
thutmosis.
That would be assuming something that is not in evidence… you are already assuming that it was a ‘angry at and smearing somebody trying to expose the lies and half truths of the administration’s case for war” without out showing any evidence of this.
I don’t find it a bit surprising that Rove didn’t mention Cooper’s conversation for a couple of reasons… Rove told Fitzgerald about talking to Novak (which was how this whole thing started), the conversation with Cooper was a short one before going on vacation and the fact that Cooper didn’t write anything on this story could very conceivably put him out of Rove’s memory. When Rove found the e-mail he took it to Fitzgerald and testified again… this isn’t the action of someone trying to hide something. You don’t take your evidence to the police if you are the one breaking the law… that doesn’t make sense.
Rob,
I haven’t heard that at all… You would think that if the news had any inkling of this being credible that it would have been splashed in the news by now. It also isn’t very consistant with Rove taking the e-mail and contacting Fitzgerald, bringing it to his attention that he had missed a conversation with Cooper. Cooper isn’t the one that wrote a story about Plame, Novak is, Rove told them about Novak up front - what would be the reason for keeping quiet on Cooper? I don’t get it.
December 15th, 2005 at 4:08 pm
I think that anyone would remember who they spoke to about a campaign to discredit a person viewed to be a political foe. Clearly Rove and Libby split up which reporters would be told, or we would have seen overlap. It’s stated like it was just a 2 min conversation. when would a conversation be sufficiently long enough to remember. Coincidentally he had this conversation close to the same time he had the conversation with Novak, adding to the importance of this talk. And why did he not tell Scott McClellan when he spoke to him regarding this situation, he did not remember that he had spoke to Novak either? Sounds like Rove is suffering from selective memory syndrome.