Karl Rove & the Missing E-mails

[H2O Man]

{1} "He gave me a little lecture about breaking a conspiracy like Watergate. 'You build convincingly from the outer edges in, you get ten times the evidence you need against the Hunts and Liddys. They feel hopelessly finished -- they may not talk right away, but the grip is on them. Then you move up and do the same thing at the next level. If you shoot too high and miss, then everyone feels more secure. Lawyers work this way. I'm sure smart reporters must too.' I recall he gave me a look as if to sayI did not belong in the category of smart reporters. 'You put the investigation back months. It puts everyone on the defensive -- editors, FBI agents, everybody has to go into a crouch after this'."
-- Bob Woodward; The Secret Man; 2005; page 91.

This description Mark Felt telling Bob Woodward how an error he and Carl Bernstein made in reporting on Bob Haldeman had hurt the Watergate investigation might help us process a report from RawStory today. Journalist Larisa Alexandrovna provided readers with information that indicates that Karl Rove is cooperating with Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation of the Plame scandal.

Most of the responses that I read on sites such as the Democratic Underground and Daily Kos were positive. The majority of those participating in discussions on the report were obviously well-informed. Many of these people asked intelligent, insightful questions. I thought it might be fun to review some of the information reported from the time of Scooter Libby's indictment through the past week, to see if it fits with what Ms. Alexandrovna reported today.

Readers may recall in late October, '05, the New York Times carried an article by Richard Stevenson and Anne Kornblut, "Leak Counsel Is Said to Press on Rove's Role." It was accompanied by two photos: one of a grinning Karl Rove driving his car; the other of a grim Scooter Libby in the back seat of a car.

After Libby was indicted, a good deal of attention was focused on Rove's attorney having convinced Fitzgerald to conduct a further investigation of Karl's reported "forgetting" his conversation with Matt Cooper. The NY Daily News had a full-page article titled "Rove not out of trouble as new grand jury may convene," (10-29-05; page 5) But attention was soon shifted by a report that none other than Bob Woodward had played a role in the Plame scandal.

But by November 28, attention was back on Karl Rove. The MSNBC blog's Hardball section carried a report, "Rove still in danger of indictment." The article noted that "..today, new clues suggest the investigation is still focused on Rove. Legal experts say the development means prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is still considering obstruction of justice or perjury charges against Bush's top advisor. Time Magazine reporter Vivica Novak -- no relation to Bob Novak -- has agreed to testify about a series of discussions with Rove's lawyer Bob Luskin that began in May 2004."

On December 15, Tucker Carlson interviewed David Schuster on "The Situation" on MSNBC. In his introduction, Carlson noted, "It also looks like an indictment decision on advisor Karl Rove could come at any minute. People in Washington are talking, really, about nothing else." He tells David that he has had "four phone calls today from friends in Washington informing me that Karl Rove is about to be indicted .... Is there any truth to it?"

Schuster answered, " "Yes, I do believe he's going to be indicted. I'm not sure whether it's going to happen soon .... there are two clues that perhaps Fitzgerald is actually moving to an indictment. First of all, it was a week ago today when he impaneled a new grand jury, presented new information, and again, prosecutors don't use new grand juries unless they want the panel to consider possible charges.

"And the other thing that was so intriguing is that Vivica Novak .... when she first talked to prosecutor Fitzgerald, at the urging of Bob Luskin, Karl's lawyer, she talked ... on an informal basis .... After that, at a certain point, the prosecutor said, 'You know what? I want your testimony on the record, under oath.' And you don't put somebody's testimony under oath unless you expect that they may be used in a criminal trial in the future."

{2} "Apparently, according to two journalist sources of mine, when Rove learned that he might have violated the law, he turned on Cheney and Libby and made it clear that he held them responsible for the problem they had created for the administration."
-- Joseph Wilson; The Politics of Truth; 2004; page 444.

Team Libby is comprised of four of the most capable attorneys in the country. Theodore Wells, Jr., Joseph Tate, William Jeffress, Jr., and John Cline could accurately be called a "dream team." In reading through several of their discovery motions, it is clear that these men are looking to represent Scooter Libby to the best of their ability. That does not include putting the needs of any other person involved in the Plame scandal before Libby's.

Thus, as detailed in several previous essays, Team Libby has filed motions requesting documents from the Office of the Vice President, and from the Central Intelligence Agency. In fact, there is an overlap, as some of the disputed documents are the President's Daily Briefings; the PDBs in question were also reviewed by VP Cheney and Scooter Libby.

The dispute between Team Libby and Fitzgerald and the CIA has been reviewed by Judge Reggie Walton. There has been a lot of back-and-forth, with Judge Walton suggesting some limits on what the defense may be entitled. Team Libby noted in a March 7 response to the CIA that they would be willing to "withdraw our request for the items in category (3) -- the materials provided only to Mr. Libby. Thus, the CIA need only produce the Vice President's morning briefing notebook for the dates at issue..." (pages 5-6)

Last Friday, March 24, Judge Walton filed a "Proposed Consent Order," (Doc. 70), that appears to outline common ground agreed to by Team Libby and Patrick Fitzgerald. While it is obvious that Mr. Fitzgerald is extremely well-prepared to try and convict Mr. Libby, I would suggest that Team Libby is looking to focus attention on the Vice President. Readers may recall a month ago, when the media reported that Team Libby has suggested that the VP told Mr. Libby to share information from a classified National Intelligence Estimate with reporters. Libby shared this with Judith Miller and Bob Woodward; Karl Rove spoke to Time's Matt Cooper in general terms about it.

Karl Rove and his attorney have been in communication with Mr. Fitzgerald between last December, when Vivica Novak gave her statement, and this past week. Fitzgerald has not simply dropped his investigation's focus on Rove's role.

On February 15, 2006, Jason Leopold reported on TruthOut that "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had not turned over emails to the special prosecutor's office..." In a January 23 motion, Fitzgerald had informed Judge Walton that he was told that some White House e-mails had been lost. Leopold reported that Gonzales cited executive privilege and national security concerns for withholding others.

Nine days later, Leopold reported that the White House had "discovered" 250 e-mails that were believed to be lost. Ms. Alexandrovna's article today, which states that Karl Rove helped identify where "lost e-mails" might be found, makes sense in this context. While many of the motions and court orders in the Libby case are sealed, it seems likely that those lost e-mails are discussed in them, as well.

[fooj]

1. What a tangled web...

Will we ever rid ourselves of these treasonous, rat bastards?

Peace.

[madokie]

4. Sure we will, its the web they weave that will catch the prey

they being the prey
:hi:
peace

[Brazenly Liberal]

40. The ratbastards ye shall always have with you

But the way they've begun to eat their own, it could come down to a few that are so bloated and sluggish, they're easy to step on.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x770058

[emulatorloo]

2. Thanks for this compilation and analysis - a great resource for those

following this -- Nominating. . .

[Me.]

3. So Was FitzG. Able To Do An End Run

around Gonzales and get the emails he was withholding, the one's he claimed privilege for?

[Disturbed]

5. Patience is indeed a virtue.

Fitz has an abundance of that but I, sadly, don't have that much. Damn! The suspense of this case is getting to me.

[madokie]

7. Your name tips me off but hang in there we will have our day to be happy

madokie says a lot about me for sure.

[Me.]

8. Clearly, This Is Making You

Disturbed!

[H2O Man]

25. See post #23.

I think that should answer your question. If not, I'll try again.

[madokie]

6. Ahh, but I love reading whatever it is you are writing. ^5's

Its all designed to protect their asses collectively, it is not to be because, when it comes down to it, it is always my defense is your demise. As we sit back and watch the * cabal self implode. I watched nixon's demise decades ago and I relish is seeing this one go down. Knowing full well I/we were right from the get go.

[H2O Man]

9. About a week ago,

I said that we were witnessing the Watergate phase of the defense teams. I think those of us old enough to remember that era clearly tend to be more patient with how this is unfolding, and more confident of the final result.

[Me.]

10. The Big Squeeze Is On

Who else will get caught up in the net? Hadley is likely, but who else? And what about Wurmser & Hannah? Are they still on the BBQ? And how about Bolton?

[bleever]

16. Sure would like me some grilled Bolton. Better yet: when Rice is cooked.

At this point, I begin to wonder who will actually not be ensnared when the net is raised.

Powell and Armitage are my candidates for least likely to have any criminal culpability; they were dupes, and often unwilling ones.

But all the rest, so well known to us from their OSP and WHIG associations, and our good pal Ari Fleischer, have no doubt retained counsel at this point.


:thumbsup:

[Festivito]

32. Looking prophetic. /nt

[Disturbed]

11. "Clearly, This Is Making You Disturbed!"

I have been Disturbed for many moons before this case came up but this and so much else is putting me over the top in anxiety.

DU helps more that it hurts though.

LOL

[H2O Man]

14. Though I think that

was meant as a response to the person who first said "Clearly, ...", I would note that anyone who isn't disturbed by this scandal must not care a great deal about the Constitution and the rule of law necessary for a civilized society. You, and indeed all of us, have very good reason for being disturbed by this administration's illegal and immoral behaviors.

I think DU helps. There is a good collection of people here, many of whom have been involved in fascinating discussions of the Plame and neocon/AIPAC scandals. One thing is clear to me: we are reaching a time when other folks need to be feeling the anxiety. They belong to the WHIG. Some work in the VP's office.

[Me.]

17. For Many Moons

We've all been Disturbed. Though I hope not too many more will wax and wane before all the debts come due. Personally, I don't think it will be.

[madokie]

12. As is plain as the fact we are correct in what it is we know

I'm sure rummy-dummy could put it some way like the knowns of the unknowns knowned what that we know that we don't know that will be proven we know or something like that. :-)
today we have a country to save, and it is ours

[Missy Vixen]

13. I'm wondering what the carrot is

I can't believe he'd let Rove walk. Rove's gone out of his way to be unpleasant and public, re: Na, na, na na na, you can't indict me...

Julie
president for life of the PFEB

[H2O Man]

15. I believe the question

is if they could find something that Fitzgerald would accept, that would allow Karl to remain employed by the White House. The RawStory article seems to address that as an unknown at this point. I agree with that -- because only Fitzgerald and Team Rove know. Had the article implied otherwise, it might have raised a question about accuracy. I'm confident that the article is accurate.

[bleever]

21. Chess as she is played.

Rove's "Nyeah nyeah, can't indict me" in fact recalls Felt's admonition.

Rove feels he has escaped that premature high-target hit, by cooperating to undermine those he believes to be more vulnerable, which at this point involves calving off the Cheney wing of the adminstration.

Alas: the law is big. It encompasses all us mortals. This is its virtue.

Rove is only trying to save his skin by offering up the big Dick because he is in his own dire jeapordy. He falsely believes that by offering up Cheney and his minions he will escape.

That's because his religion is the passion of the angry mob. It has gotten him this far: always make your opponent the representative of what is wrong.

But he's out of his paradigm. With the law, it isn't a playground slap fight. It's not about who laughs at who the loudest. It's about who committed actions that the law, in its established and accepted institutions, has said are illegal in and of themselves.

By taking refuge in his proven scoundrel's redoubt, Rove has effectively, and efficiently, moved himself into the the defendent's docket.

[H2O Man]

24. Right.

Mr. Haldeman also felt that he was safe after the Woodward & Bernsein error. He wasn't.

[Me.]

51. What Exactly Was The Error?

This is the second time in 2 days I've seen it referenced.

[H2O Man]

53. They jumped the gun

on a story that connected Mr. Haldeman to secret funding. Actually, I do not think they were wrong with the story they ran, per say. A witness said one thing about Haldeman, and indicated he had testified about it to a grand jury.

After the story was published, the fellow -- Mr. Sloan -- played games. His attorney said Sloan had not testified about Haldeman being in control of the secret fund, which had financed campaign spying and sabotage, including the incident many refer to as Watergate. (Actually, Watergate crimes, like Iran-Contra, were a series of events.)

[Me.]

56. So Did Haldeman Get A Pass On It?

Yes I could look it up but I like your view of the story. I'm also guessing, a brilliant and well studied man like FitzG., knows his history and though we'd like things to pop sooner, he's being careful not to repeat anyone else's mistake.

[H2O Man]

57. Mr. Haldeman

got but a brief pass. He was, in a way, more like Mr. Libby than Mr. Rove. A good history of his downfall, if my memory serves me correctly, would be found on my blog. It was titled the German Shepherds, something along those lines. He was a rigid, angry fellow.

Mr. Fitzgerald appears to make very few errors.

[Me.]

58. Here Is A Direct Link To The Piece

Wednesday, October 05, 2005
On German Shepherds and the Berlin Wall

http://h2oman.blogspot.com/2005/10/on-german-shepherds-and-berlin-wall.html


This Haldeman quote sounds like Rove

The descriptions were often similar and many quoted Haldeman's celebrated self-description: 'I'm the President's son-of-a-bitch.' But Haldeman was much more complicated than such descriptions indicated.


You know, I have a hard time equating that old man with a walker to the man that said the following:

He gave me a little lecture about breaking a conspiracy like Watergate. 'You build convincingly from the outer edges in, you get ten times the evidence you need against the Hunts and Liddys. They feel hopelessly finished -- they may not talk right away, but the grip is on them. Then you move up and do it at the next level. If you shoot too high and miss, then everyone feels more secure. Lawyers work this way. I'm sure smart reporters must too.' I recall he gave me a look as if to say I did not belong in that category of smart reporters. 'You put the investigation back months. It puts everyone on the defensive -- editors, FBI agents, everyone has to go into a crouch after this.' "
-- Bob Woodward; The Secret Man; 2005; pages 90-91.

[H2O Man]

59. Felt was a curious character.

A mixture of a lot of good and a lot of bad.

[foreverdem]

28. I was thinking that myself

From what I've read about Fitzgerald, in his past history, if you do a crime, you have to pay, he doesn't waver on that. So I'd be very surprised if Rove got such a sweet deal that he could walk.

[joeunderdog]

55. Fitz squeezed Karl for those emails.

I can hear it now. "I have you dead on obstruction of justice if you don't produce those." Karl must feel like he is in enough hot water--no matter what public persona he portrays.

[Vinnie From Indy]

18. Silly Rabbits!

BushCo isn't giving up either of these guys. With the amount of dirt both Rove and Libby know about BushCo and each other, I doubt they are going to war with each other in any serious way. I predict Smirky will pardon one or both should they be tried and convicted. If the last few years have proved anything it is that BushCo operates above the law. What are a few pardons when your approval rating is already in the toilet and you can manipulate election results?

[Me.]

19. Interesting That He Would Recind The Request For The PDBs He Saw

but would insist on being given Cheney's.

[troubleinwinter]

20. I am unclear about this:

"Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had not turned over emails to the special prosecutor's office..."

Some were "lost", presumably the 250 that are now "found".

But Leopold says "Gonzales cited executive privelege and national security concerns for withholding others". Is the judge able to examine these? What sort of things are they? Are they a red herring or important?

[H2O Man]

23. Judge Reggie Walton

is known for not being in favor of releasing more classified information than necessary. In general, as you may know, pursuant to Executive Order 12958, as amended by Executive Order 13292, national security information is now classified in three ways:

1- Top Secret: information that, if disclosed, could cause grave national harm.

2- Secret: information that, if disclosed, could cause serious national harm.

3- Confidential: information that, if disclosed, could cause national harm.

A single PDB could easily contain several examples of each of the three types. If the judge were to decide that he needed to determine what information the OVP or CIA needs to turn over to the defense, he can hold hearings, which can include the Ex Parte (or "only one side") motions such as Fitzgerald has done, much to the dissatisfaction of Team Libby. The general belief is that one member of Team Libby is attempting to say Scooter needs the more highly classified information, because they know the Judge and government will refuse to release it. This is the "graymail" strategy.

[Senator]

26. True about Walton, however

As to whether a judge (Walton or the grand jury judge) can demand emails or any documents that Gonzalez/WH claims as privileged, yes he can.

Should that happen at any point, we'd have a replay of US v. Nixon: which provided no clear guideline. With a (formerly) supreme court full-enough with cronies, it seems a safer bet that the legal track would support the coverup.

But the political question is another matter. The perception of obstruction could touch off an already looming impeachment juggernaut, as Nixon's firing of the prosecutor (prior to court ruling) did back then.

---

[Senator]

22. Pardon Deadline remains Nov. 8, 2006

They need only stand Fitz off until then.

--

[Chi]

38. Excuse my ignorance....what pardon deadline?

I'm certainly not challenging you...I just don't understand.

I spent a little time searching and can't find limits on that presidential power.

[H2O Man]

39. There is no evidence

that Bush intends to pardon anyone. Often, people bring up past cases. In fact, in Watergate, only one fellow was pardoned. Many were convicted ad incarcerated.

In Iran-Contra, Bush1 pardoned some felons after he was defeated in his quest for a second term. By that example, Bush would grant pardons now, as he is not going to be serving another term.

Certainly, there is a possibility of a pardon, or several pardons. But the idea of pardons should not be viewed as inevitable.

[Senator]

41. At some point pardoning co-conspirators becomes politically feasible

And while H20 is correct to say that no evidence exists that they are going to occur, I am at a loss to imagine what such evidence would look like.

But he is not correct to say that Poppy Bush simply "pardoned some felons." It is both inaccurate and misleading.

As luck would have it, the situation is in the news toady with the death of pardonee Caspar Weinberger.

In one of the first President Bush's final official acts after his 1992 loss to Bill Clinton, he granted Christmas Eve pardons to Weinberger and five others accused in the scandal.

Weinberger, who was 75 at the time, had been scheduled to stand trial in less than two weeks on charges that he concealed thousands of pages of his handwritten notes from congressional investigators and prosecutors.

He'd earlier rejected independent counsel Lawrence Walsh's plea-bargain offer to testify against his longtime friends and colleagues _ including Reagan _ and plead guilty to a misdemeanor.

Weinberger had said he was innocent to all the charges and considered the indictment a political attack. Friends said he could have never turned on associates he'd known for decades.

After the pardon was announced, Walsh charged that "the Iran-Contra coverup, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed."

As to whether or not pardons are inevitable, I would just remind that these are election theives and war criminals. Pardoning co-conspirators is akin to overtime parking to this crowd. When the political price is sufficiently discounted, they'll certainly have no moral qualms.

Pardons are simple part of their legal strategy. Their "tactical nuke."

It's like the illegal spying. They held the NY Times at bay until after the election theft, then tried to get it out and dismissed under the cover of off-year holiday inattention. They still try to quote "public doesn't care" polling that was taken 2 weeks after the news broke, before the reality had time to pervade the distracted public. Luckily, they've not fully succeeded since Reid shut down the Senate and Feingold floated the Censure resolution (rare acts from a party with "taste for the capillaries, not the jugular").

The "deadline" is Nov. 8 because that's when it would no longer effect this cycle and could become "old news" long before the next cycle. Certainly the prospect of impeachment would have a big effect on the decision, but if the DC Dems continue to cower like an abuse victim, they'll continue to abuse the law and the country.

It's just what they do.

--
www.january6th.org

[H2O Man]

46. I assume that

people are familiar with who Bush 1 pardoned, and why. The point is he did it after he was no longer looking to be re-elected. Bush2 clearly has no thoughts of being re-elected. Were he going to pardon anyone, there would be no reason to wait. In a number of ways, Bush2 reminds me more of nixon than his father. One of those ways is that I do not think he would give serious thought to pardoning others, because he does not want to appear to endorse their crimes. It's a form of selfishness that I think will keep pardons from happening. I could, of course, be wrong. Many people think Bush will pardon one or more people involved in this scandal.

[Senator]

47. There are many reasons to wait

the looming election is only the most obvious. The pardons could also be useful to distract from more damaging news, like somethng in Iraq.

And the bushkid's personality or thought process -- if one exists -- would only be a small part of the political equation. The possible downside of appearance of endorsing crimes will be focussed grouped against the prospect of close associates being indicted, convicted, or whatever. They'll also be studied along with a variety of propaganda strategies to combat the negative appearances. Frank Luntz gets big money for this stuff.

Bottom line is that whether he waits until his last day to do "mercy pardons" or finds a more advantageous or necessary time to do it, he's not going to allow any of his henchmen to have a criminal record. It just wouldn't do.

Like dumping Andy Card or Harriet Myers, he'll do what circumstances force him to do. And then pat himself on the back for being so decisive.

--

[H2O Man]

48. Dumping Card and Myers

is an interesting way to look at this. Bush will dump people for his own needs. A pardon is the exact opposite: it is embracing someone, despite one's personal needs.

If he were looking for a benefit to his party for the 2006 elections, it might have been better to grant a sweeping pardons before others besides Scooter are potentially indicted. That would seem especially true in terms of Karl Rove. An indictment, or a plea bargain agreement, would mean that Karl would be out of the White House.

My position isn't that Bush is too moral a man to derail justice for his own needs; rather, he is a selfish, self-righteous fellow who will always justify doing whatever benefits his needs.

[Senator]

49. It's business, not personal

And they certainly weighed the "pardon the lot" option at several points in the process and decided it wasn't worth the hit in the polls.

But the type of fellow bush is would only be a small part of the equation.

--

[H2O Man]

54. I strongly disagree.

With Nixon and Bush1, what type of person each was played a significant role. There is no reason to assume that Bush2's personality is not a significant factor.

[Chi]

50. Thanks for the 'deadline' answer.

I agree there will be wholesale pardons before this Asshole gets thru the outdoor,
with a 'with us, or against us' mindset what else should one expect ('you're doing a great job, Brownie').

I just wasn't getting the Nov 8th date...now I know.

[Joe Fields]

27. well presented, but......

have you discovered anything new?

[H2O Man]

31. Well

I discussed the RawStory report, which is new; and provided information about the judge's proposal from March 24, 2006.

[formercia]

29. Pitting Rove and Cheney against each other

Two of the most ruthless people in the Administration. This is going to be good.

[burythehatchet]

30. I continue to believe that

Cheney will be cornered, then he will have his final heart attack, then every bad act will be pinned on the dead Cheney, then all the criminals will be safe, then they will reappear in the next Republican administration. Lather, rinse, repeat.

[stop the bleeding]

33. H2O Man - Andy Card?

I need to know what your take is on this development - I can barely concentrate or type, my mind is going wild at the possibilities.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2192457

[H2O Man]

36. A number of possibilities.

On another thread, I was asked if it was unusual for someone in his position to leave with the president's poll numbers being so low? Good question; I didn't have a good answer. Another DUer pointed out that COSs don't usually last as long as Card did.

It may be he was simply tired of the job. It may be he is the first of the republican-recommended "White House shake-up." Or, it could be what we hope!

Card was, by position, Rove and Libby's superior. An Oct 18, 2005 NY Times article ("Bush Crises Raise Criticism of Chief of Staff's Management Style") addressed his inability to function as such.

Further, we know that in September of 2003, when the DoJ informed Gonzales that they were investigating the Plame scandal, Gonzales gave Card a 12-hour "head's up," potentially allowing the WHIG an opportunity to play Fawn Hall. More, Card was on AF1 in the July '03 African trip, where the file on Wilson and Plame was being handed around. In Sept '03, he set up an opportunity for Bush and Tenet to discuss the scandal. And he was a weekly WHIG participant.

[stop the bleeding]

37. Yes he is pretty convenient "golden screw" in the Plame affair

Thank you.

[understandinglife]

43. Given that Card formed WHIG, if I remember correctly, and given ...

... his role in attempting to pressure Ashcroft and Comey to cooperate with the FISA violations being perpetrated by the NSA, I wonder if his departing might signal that, in addition to Rove and Hadley, that Fitzgerald has indicated Card is now a target.

Since we know from page 5, # 9 in the Libby indictment that Cheney is of central interest to Fitzgerald and since it is likely that Bush would have had to have given the ultimate "get Wilson" for folk to have outed ValerieP as a CIA NOC (I still refuse to believe that with all his arrogance Cheney, or anyone else in the WH, would have done that without Bush's explicit ok), Card truly is the linchpin if Fitzgerald is making a case to indict both Bush and Cheney - something the Constitution does not preclude - for EO12958, 18 USC 793 and/or IIPA violations.


Peace.

[robertpaulsen]

45. Considering the timing of the resignation with the Fitz news...

I'd say this has more to do with Plame than with * giving a damn about poll numbers. This is getting very interesting!

:hi:

[Sydnie]

52. I had forgotten about the heads up time

That is a good point NOT to forget again. Thanks for giving my memory a kick.

34. the story continues

:popcorn:

[Burried News]

35. Let History remember: Karl Rove - Republican Rat Fink

Nasty, ain't we Karl?

[Garbo 2004]

42. As I recall, emails were missing from both OVP and the Executive Office.

As Fitz noted in his "abundance of caution" statement regarding OVP and EOP emails "not preserved" through the normal archiving process. It seems to me these "missing" EOP emails are in addition to those Gonzales refuses to turn over to Fitz.

So reportedly, Rover's helpfully pointed Fitz to the 250 pages of missing emails from the Vice President's Office which were then turned over. Which of course is what one would expect Rover to do, point the finger at the VP's office. But what of the missing emails from the EOP? Maybe there's an overlap as OVP staff emailed EOP staff (like Rove) and that's how Rover could help find the OVP emails (or if he was aware of or involved in the process in which they were "lost"). But one wonders what may still be out there. Rover seems to be able to recover his memory rather nicely when given enough incentive.

It's just that the reports appear to only address missing OVP emails that were turned over and I'm wondering if there are still EOP emails that apparently are "missing" in addition to those Gonzales is not turning over. I guess the answer is we just don't know and perhaps we'll see if there is any further public mention or clarification.

44. and I wonder if Gonzales is implicated in any of this

they should not have gotten a heads up. Everyone knew they would start the shredding.