The Rove-Ashcroft Connection

Investigative reporter Murray Waas again advances our knowledge of the leak investigation, this time with an article in the Village Voice (I thank Murray for the heads up). The article focuses on the time period just prior to John Ashcroft's decision to recuse himself from the case. Waas writes:

"Justice Department officials made the crucial decision
in late 2003 to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate
the leak of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie
Plame in large part because investigators had begun to
specifically question the veracity of accounts provided
to them by White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove,
according to senior law enforcement officials.

Several of the federal investigators were also deeply
concerned that then attorney general John Ashcroft
was personally briefed regarding the details of at least
one FBI interview with Rove, despite Ashcroft's own
longstanding personal and political ties to Rove, the
Voice has also learned. The same sources said Ashcroft was
also told that investigators firmly believed that Rove
had withheld important information from them during
that FBI interview."

The article includes the following anonymous quote:

"'It would have been a nightmare scenario if Ashcroft
let something slip to an aide or someone else they had
in common with Rove . . . and then word got back to Rove
or the White House what investigators were saying about
him,' says a former senior Justice Department official,
familiar with the matter."

I had previously thought that the focus on Karl Rove was a relatively recent development in the investigation, likely prompted by something Fitzgerald had learned from Matt Cooper or his emails. Now it appears that the veracity of Rove's story has been a focus for prosecutors since very early on in the investigation, and it likely led to the appointment of Patrick Fitzgerald in the first place. Previous news reports, quoting sources sympathetic to Rove, have indicated that Rove approached Fitzgerald (not vice versa) to correct his previous omission regarding his conversation with Cooper. Could it be that the "nightmare scenario" described by Waas's source actually transpired? Could Ashcroft or one of his aides have alerted Rove to the fact that prosecutors were suspicious of his testimony? It's certainly possible. Moreover, it's interesting to learn that Rove's initial interview, in which he failed to mention his conversation with Cooper, took place prior to the appointment of the special prosecutor. Is it possible that Rove underestimated the gravity of the investigation, and as a result, was less than candid when initially interviewed? Again, I don't know, but it's hard to understand how Rove would have forgotten about his conversation with Cooper. After all, Rove thought the conversation was notable enough at the time to send an email about it to Stephen Hadley. And keep in mind, other than Novak's column, Cooper's Time Magazine story was the most notable article written about Plame. It seems likely to me that Rove would have been asked specifically about Cooper's article in his initial FBI interview. Did he deny being Cooper's source? Did he claim not to remember? There may be an innocent explanation for Rove's initial testimony, whatever it was, but based on what we know, it's not hard to see why investigators were suspicious of Rove and anxious to get a special prosecutor appointed.

On a final note, why is it that Murray Waas seems to have a monopoly on anonymous sources close to the Fitzgerald investigation? All the major media outlets seem to have anonymous sources familiar with Rove's side of the story, but Waas alone seems to be advancing the ball in any significant way. Well done, Murray. Keep up the good work.

UPDATE: Murray Waas has a follow up to his Village Voice article at his blog, Whatever Already. There he adds the following bit of information about Rove's initial claim that he heard about Plame from a journalist:

"What has not been previously reported until now
(a blog breaks news!?), is that not only could Rove
not remember the name of the journalist who
purportedly might have told him of Plame's CIA
employment, but he also claimed to remember
virtually nothing about the circumstances of the
purported conversation. He could not even recall
whether the conversation took place on the phone
or in person."

Again, it's not hard to imagine why investigators would have been suspicious of Rove's story.