Throwing Sand In Face of the Umpire

Speculation about the fate of Karl Rove has centered around his failure to initially disclose his conversation with Matthew Cooper about Plame and whether his subsequent correction of that testimony a year later is enough to get him off the hook.

But it looks like Karl Rove did the same thing Libby did, way back in October 2003, as it related to his initial call with Robert Novak:

But Fitzgerald hasn’t resolved another important element in the case: what
appears to be misleading statements Rove made to FBI investigators on Oct. 8,
2003, less than two weeks after the Justice Department announced that it had
launched a criminal probe into Plame’s outing, the attorneys said.

Those close to the case say that Rove was caught up in a game of
semantics when he was questioned by FBI investigators, insisting to federal
agents that he was not the individual who had leaked Plame-Wilson’s identity to
conservative columnist Robert Novak. Novak was the first to make public her name
and CIA status in a July 14, 2003 column.

Rove told investigators that he merely passed along information about
Plame-Wilson to other journalists and White House officials after it had already
appeared in Novak’s column, the attorneys said. He maintained, they added, that
it was entirely within his right to do so being that Plame-Wilson’s husband,
former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, was publicly criticizing the Bush
Administration and had claimed in a New York Times op-ed that it had “twisted”
prewar intelligence to build public support for a preemptive military strike
against Iraq.

According to lawyers, Rove did not tell FBI investigators in 2003 that he
had spoken with Novak prior to his column being published and had been one of
the two “senior administration officials” cited in Novak’s column as having
confirmed Plame’s identity and CIA employment.

So it appears that, just like Libby initially failed to reveal that he told reporters about Plame, Rove failed to reveal that he had spoken to Novak about this issue -- an entirely implausible bit of testimony, given the fact that Novak's column was the basis for this whole to-do and a conversation with Novak around July of 2003 would have some added significance after this story broke. Undoubtedly, when the whole shit-storm blew up, Rove must have remembered that he had spoken with Novak. There's simply no way that Rove could legitimately claim he "forgot" about this piece of information.

Oh, and then there's this piece of information, from Libby's indictment, about "Official A", aka Rove:

21. On or about July 10 or July 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke to a senior official
in the White House ("Official A") who advised LIBBY of a conversation Official A
had earlier that week with columnist Robert Novak in which Wilson's wife was
discussed as a CIA employee involved in Wilson's trip. LIBBY was advised
by Official A that Novak would be writing a story about Wilson's wife.

This seems to me to be the piece of information that kills Rove and his "I forgot" defense. Presumably, that defense, like his defense concerning the Cooper conversation, rests on a "I didn't think it was important or significant enough so I just forgot about it"-type justification. Yet he told Libby about it right after it happened, but then "forgot" to tell federal investigators.

Sounds like Turd Blossom could be in trouble. He's scheduled to keynote the Federalist Society black-tie event on November 10. Hope they've got a back-up speaker.
- posted by Joshua @ 7:10 PM