Plame Gossip - Rove got a target letter?

This is a big shift in the Plame case regarding Rove that had gone unreported until today. Jason Leopold is reporting

Karl Rove's appearance before a grand jury in the CIA leak case Wednesday comes on the heels of a "target letter" sent to his attorney recently by Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, signaling that the Deputy White House Chief of Staff may face imminent indictment, sources that are knowledgeable about the probe said Wednesday. ....

In an interview last week, Luskin confirmed that Rove was a "subject" of Fitzgerald's probe. In a previous interview, Luskin asserted that Rove would not be indicted by Fitzgerald, but he was unwilling to make that same prediction again during an interview last week....

Micheal Scherer at Salon has a quote from "a spokesman for Rove" who says that the reports of a target letter are "utterly false.

Later: Jason has a response up to the denial.

Also: I'm not an expert in legal linguistics, but after Rove's testimony today, Luskin, Rove's attorney issued a statement that

"U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald, had advised Rove that he was "not a target of the investigation." However, Luskin said Fitzgerald has not made any decision about charges."

What does this mean? Is it that Rove will be indicted for perjury, but that is secondary to the investigation? Is it saying that the endpoint in the investigation is still many moves away? Is this confirmation that the real hunt for the real crime of conspiracy or obstruction in the VP's office is yet to be revealed?

This is what I was afraid of in the last post, more of a cliffhanger than a resolution. I hate sweeps week.

Tune in next post for more Adventures in Justice. (cue the weighty music)

Update 2: Reading a little more about Luskin's statement, I think Rove is singing. If he was just testifying about his own legal jeopardy, there would be no need for this request.

"At the request of the Special Counsel, Mr. Rove will not discuss the substance of his testimony," Luskin said.

I mean, there is no reason that a possible indictee should be limited in speaking about his own testimony unless it impacts other potential cases. So, I think we're going to have all this kerfuffle, Rove may or may not be indicted, but the investigation will plod on.

Using the chess analogy I keep falling back on, Fitzgerald appears to be in the phase of attritting pieces, Rove being a knight or a bishop. He has postion. He has time. It is now just the laboriously slow process of consolidating strength and control to trap the king and win the game.

Think Cheney's heart can take it?

Update 3: Talkleft seems to have come to the same conclusion I have about Rove singing about the 250 "missing" emails, and Cheney as the ultimate target, but it's much briefer and not in my roundabout discursive writing style.