Information Sharing on the Rove Indictment Story

[Veronica.Franco]

By Marc Ash,Sun May 21st, 2006 at 11:58:26 AM

EDT :: Fitzgerald Investigation

"I'd like to break this posting into two categories: What we know, and what we believe. They will be clearly marked.

We know that we have now three independent sources confirming that attorneys for Karl Rove were handed an indictment either late in the night of May 12 or early in the morning of May 13. We know that each source was in a position to know what they were talking about. We know that the office of Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald will not confirm, will not deny, will not comment on its investigation or on our report. We know that both Rove's attorney Robert Luskin and Rove's spokesman Mark Corallo have categorically denied all key facts we have set forth. We know we have information that directly contradicts Luskin and Corallo's denials. We know that there were two network news crews outside of the building in Washington, DC that houses the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm that represents Karl Rove. We know that the 4th floor of that building (where the Patton Boggs offices are located) was locked down all day Friday and into Saturday night. We know that we have not received a request for a retraction from anyone. And we know that White House spokesman Tony Snow now refuses to discuss Karl Rove - at all.

Further, we know - and we want our readers to know - that we are dependent on confidential sources. We know that a report based solely on information obtained from confidential sources bears some inherent risks. We know that this is - by far - the biggest story we have ever covered, and that we are learning some things as we go along. Finally, we know that we have the support of those who have always supported us, and that must now earn the support of those who have joined us as of late.

We now move on to what we believe. (If you are looking for any guarantees, please turn back now.)

We believe that we hit a nerve with our report. When I get calls on my cell phone from Karl Rove's attorney and spokesman, I have to wonder what's up. "I" believe - but cannot confirm - that Mark Corallo, Karl Rove's spokesman gave Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post my phone number. I believe Howard Kurtz contacted me with the intention of writing a piece critical of our organization. I know that Anne Marie Squeo of the Wall Street Journal attacked us and independent journalism as a whole in her piece titled, "Rove's Camp Takes Center of Web Storm / Bloggers Underscore How Net's Reporting, Dynamics Provide Grist for the Rumor Mill." We believe that rolling out that much conservative journalistic muscle to rebut this story is telling. And we believe that Rove's camp is making a concerted effort to discredit our story and our organization.

Further - and again this is "What We Believe" - Rove may be turning state's evidence. We suspect that the scope of Fitzgerald's investigation may have broadened - clearly to Cheney - and according to one "off the record source" to individuals and events not directly related to the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame. We believe that the indictment which does exist against Karl Rove is sealed. Finally, we believe that there is currently a great deal of activity in the Plame investigation.

We know that this story is of vital interest to the community, and that providing as much information as we can is very important to our readers. We want you to know that this is challenging territory and that we are proceeding with as much speed as the terrain will allow."

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/

FWIW ...

[Mojorabbit]

1. Well I am willing to wait

and I hope he takes them all down. I hope Rove squeals like a pig. I hope it happens soon before we have lost all our rights.

[midnight]

2. Thanks for the update.

When I read that Cheney had written notes all over Joe Wilson's statements to the newspaper, and the indictment not being released, I wondered if the focus would be shifted. I hope this isn't another distraction on Roves part to buy more time. Who knows?

[pnwmom]

3. Thank you, Veronica, for posting this, and WELCOME to DU!

[MGKrebs]

4. My meager application of logic leads me to believe

that either Rove is cooperating or there is some sort of national security interests at play that require a delay in public activity.

I mean, everybody, even the msm, have basically indicted Rove already. It seems it's just a matter of the precise timing of the formality of it.

[Moderator]

5. Lock

Please take this discussion here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1250919