Has Bush Known All Along?
Yesterday's New York Times article reported the following:
So let me get this straight. At one point Fitzgerald was exploring a charge against Rove for lying to the President, the chief law enforcement officer in the country. But after discussions with the President's personal attorney, James Sharp, Fitzgerald backed off that charge. Doesn't that imply that Sharp persuaded Fitzgerald that Rove had been truthful with the President? And doesn't that imply that the President has known all along about Rove's role in this affair?
If so, that would be consistent with the Thomas DeFrank article in the Daily News a few weeks ago which claimed that Rove had come clean to the President back in 2003 and had been privately reprimanded. As I noted then, however, that scenario is potentially very problematic for the President.
Mr. Fitzgerald no longer seems to be actively
examining some of the more incendiary
questions involving Mr. Rove. At one point,
he explored whether Mr. Rove
misrepresented his role in the leak case to
President Bush - an issue that led to
discussions between Mr. Fitzgerald and
James E. Sharp, a lawyer for Mr. Bush, an
associate of Mr. Rove said.
So let me get this straight. At one point Fitzgerald was exploring a charge against Rove for lying to the President, the chief law enforcement officer in the country. But after discussions with the President's personal attorney, James Sharp, Fitzgerald backed off that charge. Doesn't that imply that Sharp persuaded Fitzgerald that Rove had been truthful with the President? And doesn't that imply that the President has known all along about Rove's role in this affair?
If so, that would be consistent with the Thomas DeFrank article in the Daily News a few weeks ago which claimed that Rove had come clean to the President back in 2003 and had been privately reprimanded. As I noted then, however, that scenario is potentially very problematic for the President.
posted by A.L. at 12:14 AM
3 Comments:
Grand Jury testimony of Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff of the United States (COSTUS), leaked by Rove-ing reporter (humor). How much will COSTUS cost us?
It is posted at: Karl Rove Says Who Leaked First
Number one hit on MSN Search when searching for “Rove and Fitzgerald”
Number two hit on Google blog search using “Rove or Karl Rove”
Please keep my identity a secret. Double super Secret.
Middle-aged, Middle-of-the-road, Mid-Westerner
I wonder what the crime would be if Rove lied to Bush.
This version may be consistant with the DeFrank article, but it is not consistant with Rove's reported statements to investigators on the subject as reported in this 10/10/05 AP article that had this
Senior aide Karl Rove denied to President Bush that he engaged in an effort to disclose the identity of a covert CIA operative...familiar with Rove's statements in a criminal investigation.
Polly
he engaged in an effort to disclose the identity of a covert CIA operative
That's a pretty specific denial. What if Rove was not part of any coordinated "effort", and had no idea if Plame was covert, but just confirmed to Novak something Novak already knew (as of fall 2003, Rove is forgetting Cooper).
And maybe the Pres. lawyer said that the President's testimony will (a) be contested as a matter of executive privilege, and (b) not be helpful - if Bush didn't know the follow-up questions to ask, he might have accepted as definitive the denial cited in the first line. And, one might add, that first line denial might well be accurate as to whether Rove commited a crime and /or had criminal intent - Fitzgerald did not indict him for the Novak call.
Tom Maguire
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home