Rove goes for "partial admission" in US Attorney firings.

Partial admission is a time worn tactic for dealing with scandal. The idea is to admit what can likely be proved without admitting the crime. It is critical in this phase to create a "reasonable doubt" story while not claiming anything that can be later disproven.

The White House acknowledged on Sunday that presidential adviser Karl Rove served as a conduit for complaints about federal prosecutors as House investigators declared their intention to question him about any role he may have played in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Rove relayed complaints from Republican officials and others to the Justice Department and the White House counsel's office. She said Rove, the chief White House political operative, specifically recalled passing along complaints about former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and may have mentioned the grumblings about Iglesias to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

(Notice the way Rove brings in Alberto Gonzales (admit what can be proved,) but still allows distance between himself and the wrongdoing ("may have mentioned the grumblings to".))

As I pointed out last night,

In the grand scheme of the breakdown of a coverup, we're at the point where secondary characters begin to tell their stories for self protection, ("I only did this, but he did THAT,") and just beginning the section where primary characters offer partial revelations of truth in a desperate attempt to make it go away. ("What I did was unethical, but not illegal")

These things break open when someone from Group A, in an effort at exculpation, throws a member of Group B under the bus.

The one thing I would add is that Karl Rove is not a standard Group B. As he is so powerful, whoever "throws him under the bus" will have to make damn sure he's dead.