Is Fitzgerald Trying to "Flip" Rove?
This just in from the AP:
What's going on? Here's one possible explanation: Fitzgerald's office contacted Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, and told him that Rove was going to be indicted unless they could reach some sort of arrangement. That arrangement likely entailed Rove returning to the grand jury and testifying against others, most likely Libby. In exchange for his testimony, Rove might be charged with a lesser offense than he otherwise would have or avoid indictment all together.
Fitzgerald may be trying to "flip" Rove in an effort to buttress his case against more central players in this affair (or bigger fish). At any rate, I'd be very worried if I were Libby.
UPDATE/CORRECTION: In my hasty first read of the AP article, I somehow overlooked this seemingly important paragraph:
I'm not sure whether this is consistent with my speculation above. If Rove offered to testify again way back in July, it was likely in response to Matt Cooper's testimony. Rove might have wanted to clear up any inconsistencies between Cooper's testimony and his own. The fact that Fitzgerald is now taking him up on that offer may just mean that Fitzgerald is on the fence as to whether or not to indict Rove. In other words, this last minute testimony may have nothing to do with Libby or anyone else. It may be all about Rove. We'll see soon enough.
Federal prosecutors have accepted an offer
from presidential adviser Karl Rove to give
11th-hour testimony in the case of a CIA
officer's leaked identity but have warned they
cannot guarantee he won't be indicted,
according to people directly familiar with the
investigation. . . .
Rove has already made at least three grand
jury appearances and his return at this late
stage in the investigation is unusual.
The prosecutor did not give Rove similar
warnings before his earlier grand jury
appearances.
What's going on? Here's one possible explanation: Fitzgerald's office contacted Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, and told him that Rove was going to be indicted unless they could reach some sort of arrangement. That arrangement likely entailed Rove returning to the grand jury and testifying against others, most likely Libby. In exchange for his testimony, Rove might be charged with a lesser offense than he otherwise would have or avoid indictment all together.
Fitzgerald may be trying to "flip" Rove in an effort to buttress his case against more central players in this affair (or bigger fish). At any rate, I'd be very worried if I were Libby.
UPDATE/CORRECTION: In my hasty first read of the AP article, I somehow overlooked this seemingly important paragraph:
Rove offered in July to return to the grand jury
for additional testimony and Fitzgerald accepted
that offer Friday after taking grand jury
testimony from the formerly jailed New York
Times reporter Judith Miller.
I'm not sure whether this is consistent with my speculation above. If Rove offered to testify again way back in July, it was likely in response to Matt Cooper's testimony. Rove might have wanted to clear up any inconsistencies between Cooper's testimony and his own. The fact that Fitzgerald is now taking him up on that offer may just mean that Fitzgerald is on the fence as to whether or not to indict Rove. In other words, this last minute testimony may have nothing to do with Libby or anyone else. It may be all about Rove. We'll see soon enough.
posted by A.L. at 3:28 PM
1 Comments:
I doubt it has anything to do with him flipping. He got caught with giving different testimony to the FBI than he gave to the grand jury. He needs to get in front of them again to explain this away. that is why he offered to testify again.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home