Rovewatch begins again.
On Countdown, Olberman reported that Patrick Fitzgerald is holding a meeting with his team tonight and extrapolated that he will be staying over into tomorrow. Tomorrow and Friday are the next two days the grand jury is scheduled to meet. (Note: meetings are scheduled every Wed and Fri, so take the word scheduled as the word available not as an indication they are, in fact, meeting tomorrow.)
Whether you believe Leopold's report or not, tomorrow is another available day for Fitzgerald to meet with the grand jury and for a Rove indictment/announcement. There's all sorts of tea leaves readings out there as to Rove's mood, etc., but at this point, I'm just going to wait for the story to break tomorrow. So, bottom line, the Rove watch is back on.
(side note: We still don't know about Jason Leopold's Saturday report that Rove had already been indicted and was in the midst of a plea deal. We're not yet out of the window for an announcement in that scenario, and until we are, I'm not going to treat the report as false.
It's my belief that Leopold and the folks at truthout faithfully reported what they were told, whether what they were told was true or not is another question entirely. I think that the whole effort to prove or disprove that story is a distraction from the real story, the pending Rove indictment. If it comes to pass that the report is proved false, I will address it then.)
Whether you believe Leopold's report or not, tomorrow is another available day for Fitzgerald to meet with the grand jury and for a Rove indictment/announcement. There's all sorts of tea leaves readings out there as to Rove's mood, etc., but at this point, I'm just going to wait for the story to break tomorrow. So, bottom line, the Rove watch is back on.
(side note: We still don't know about Jason Leopold's Saturday report that Rove had already been indicted and was in the midst of a plea deal. We're not yet out of the window for an announcement in that scenario, and until we are, I'm not going to treat the report as false.
It's my belief that Leopold and the folks at truthout faithfully reported what they were told, whether what they were told was true or not is another question entirely. I think that the whole effort to prove or disprove that story is a distraction from the real story, the pending Rove indictment. If it comes to pass that the report is proved false, I will address it then.)
posted by mikevotes at
8:55 PM
6 Comments:
Aw hell Fitz, throw a Cheney indictment in the mix for good measure. You know, to sort of make up for getting us all excited, then nervous and doubtful.
A brotha can wish can't he?
By
zen, at 9:32 PM
No, Cheney's not now. Fitzgerald is in the process of clearing away all of the perjury and obstruction to clear the deck evidence wise before he goes after the underlying crime, and then maybe cheney.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 9:57 PM
Mike, you're right that the effort to prove or disprove Leopold's article has distracted from the real issue at hand. I got tied up in it because I was annoyed at myself for not knowing about Leopold's "past". I think I might have looked at his articles a little more dubiously had I known about the problems he had at Salon and Dow Jones Newswire, but that's okay. I hope it turns out he's right in the Rove case and then I'll happily eat crow for beginning to doubt him.
Still, when Thomas DeFrank said to Olbermann last night that only Fitzgerald and the grand jury know whether Rove is going to be indicted and anybody who says differently, even one of Rove's attorneys, is blowing smoke, made a lot of sense to me. The leaks aren't coming from the prosecution, so I guess I should have been looking at all of them dubiously.
Should be a fun rest of the week, though. If Fitz remains in town today and shows up at the GJ, we'll know in the morning or early afternoon, right? That doesn't mean an indictment is being handed up today, but it would be a good sign if Fitzgerald showed up at the GJ for some business.
By
Reality-Based Educator, at 5:52 AM
I knew that he had a dubious past although I didn't know all the details. Even more recently, I wondered why suddenly he jumped from Rawstory to truthout.
But you know what,at this point, I really believe that he honestly reported what he was told. That doesn't mean the story is right, but at this point, my working theory is that he got burned. With elections around the corner, the last thing the Whitehouse needs is more stories coming out and he has broken stories.
After all, what is the Plame investigation all about? Retaliating against somebody who wrote stuff the administration didn't like.
And what is the admin involved in right now? A Nixonesque effort to stop leaks at any cost. And with his history, this would be the best way to burn him. And on top of all that, Rove has a history of the dirtiest political tricks.
I'll write more later one way or the other, but remember that if the story is wrong, that doesn't necessarily mean that the reporter didn't report it honestly.
(Of Course, I believe Dan Rather was set up too. Did you know that the Bush Air National Guard story that broke so suddenly and ruined his credibility bumped a story on the Niger forgeries that never got broascast because it was fairly speculative?)
Maybe I'm too gullible or maybe I'm too cynical, but my sense of it is that he was set up by the Rove political machine. If he's proved to be a fabricator, then certainly I'll pile on, but it's the same history that has everyone so quick to blame him that would make this such a brilliant operation.
Again, I'll do something more formal later if the story turns out to be false.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 7:22 AM
TalkLeft has stated that Jason will name his sources if in fact they lied to him. Its sad that his credibility has come into question over this.
By
Unknown, at 7:50 AM
Dusty, I really like the theory of outing sources who lie, but he better have something to back up his claims or we're right back where we are now.
What if he names them and they say, "no, I never said that?"
Did we learn anything? Was he lying? Were they?
I think outing false sources is a great idea, but I wonder how it would play out.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 8:03 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home