Rove Article Is Out

The Newsweek article about Karl Rove and the Plame leak (mentioned previously here) is out. Here’s the key excerpt:

The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper’s sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.

So Lawrence O’Donnell’s breathless allegations were all much ado about nothing.

Of course, this isn’t likely to stop the leftist-driven media storm over the accusation that Rove was the leaker.

Update:

Lawrence O’Donnell reacts to today’s news:

On Saturday, Luskin decided to reveal that Rove did have at least one conversation with Cooper, but Luskin told the Times he would not “characterize the substance of the conversation.”

Luskin claimed that the prosecutor “asked us not to talk about what Karl has had to say.” This is highly unlikely. Prosecutors have absolutely no control over what witnesses say when they leave the grand jury room. Rove can tell us word-for-word what he said to the grand jury and would if he thought it would help him. And notice that Luskin just did reveal part of Rove’s grand jury testimony, the fact that he had a conversation with Cooper. Rove would not let me get one day of traction on this story if he could stop me. If what I have reported is not true, if Karl Rove is not Matt Cooper’s source, Rove could prove that instantly by telling us what he told the grand jury. Nothing prevents him from doing that, except a good lawyer who is trying to keep him out of jail.

Right. So the burden of proof is now on Rove, not his accusers.

That doesn’t make any sense. If O’Donnell and others want to prove to the American public that Rove was behind the Plame leak let them present their evidence. And they have presented some. We know that Rove spoke with Cooper and was a source for his article. What we absolutely do not know is what information Rove provided.

Could he have leaked the Plame info? Probably. Is it Rove’s job to prove he didn’t leak it? Of course not. The fact that O’Donnell and others are asking Rove to defend himself only proves that they have no really convincing proof. Otherwise they would have made it public by now.

Rob Port owns and operates Say Anything.

Paul Harvey Goes Over The Top
A truly hardened criminal

32 Comments

  1. -S July 3, 2005
  2. oyster July 3, 2005
  3. Rob July 3, 2005
  4. frameone July 3, 2005
  5. Rob July 3, 2005
  6. -S- July 3, 2005
  7. J-homey July 3, 2005
  8. BlogDog July 3, 2005
  9. frameone July 3, 2005
  10. Darleen July 3, 2005
  11. Heywood J. July 3, 2005
  12. frameone July 3, 2005
  13. Inquiring July 3, 2005
  14. Inquiring July 3, 2005
  15. Heywood J. July 3, 2005
  16. Carrick Talmadge July 3, 2005
  17. Carrick Talmadge July 3, 2005
  18. Pansy July 4, 2005
  19. john t July 4, 2005
  20. chad July 4, 2005
  21. frameone July 4, 2005
  22. Carrick Talmadge July 4, 2005
  23. Carrick Talmadge July 4, 2005
  24. bullwinkle July 4, 2005
  25. Marcus Aurelius July 4, 2005
  26. B Moe July 4, 2005
  27. chad July 4, 2005
  28. Dr. Weevil July 4, 2005
  29. -S- July 4, 2005
  30. B Moe July 4, 2005
  31. Big Bang Hunter July 4, 2005
  32. cancon July 5, 2005