Now that we know Matt Cooper's sources were Lewis Libby and Karl Rove, the question that needs answering is: Where did Karl Rove get the information. The AP reports today,

[Rove lawyer Robert] Luskin declined to say how Rove found out that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and refused to say how Rove came across the information that it was Wilson's wife who authorized his trip to Africa.

Was it through attending meetings of the White House Iraq Group with Lewis Libby? I hate to sound like a broken record, but I keep returning to these four articles:

Scott McClellan in today's press conference finally addressed Karl Rove and the leak controversy:

"Any individual who works here at the White House has the confidence of the president. They wouldn't be working here at the White House if they didn't have the president's confidence," McClellan said.

Say hello to the new blog, Fire Him Now. Let the frog march begin.

Update: Check out Rove's Pink Slip - also a welcome advertiser on TalkLeft.

Rep. Louise Slaughter writes:

It is time to hold the President accountable. He made a promise to the American people that he'd fire whoever leaked the identity of Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA agent. Now that we know the leaker was, at least in part, Karl Rove; it is time for the President to keep his word.

Putting the life of an undercover CIA agent and our national security in jeopardy cannot be tolerated. Karl Rove clearly deserves his pink slip, and we¹re going to give it to him.

The Democrats met with Bush today and suggested a few Hispanic judges as Supreme Court nominees. One of them is 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Edward Prado, whom I have often said would make the best choice.

Top Senate Democrats floated the names of potential candidates for the Supreme Court on Tuesday in a meeting with President Bush, describing them as the type of nominee who could avoid a fierce confirmation battle.

Several officials familiar with the discussion said Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals and Judge Ed Prado of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, both of whom are Hispanic, were among the names mentioned as Bush met with key lawmakers from both parties to discuss the first high court vacancy in 11 years.

Draft Prado.

Thanks to an astute reader who found these quotes on how the Government learned Judith Miller had information on Valerie Plame:

• "Fitzgerald determined which reporters were talking to government officials during that period by reviewing government phone logs."
  Source: The Washington Post, July 7, 2005, p. A13. This sentence appears in the print edition but not the online version.
  

  

• "Investigators studied government telephone records to learn which reporters had spoken to officials in the Bush administration. Among them were Judith Miller and Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper."
  Source (interestingly): Voice of America

by TChris

Reversing decisions of a trial court and the state court of appeals, the Wisconsin Supreme Court today ordered a new trial for Ralph Armstrong, convicted of the 1980 rape and murder of Charise Kamps. While the prosecution clung to its theory that Armstrong was the rapist, it had difficulty explaining new DNA tests that excluded Armstrong as the source of the semen recovered from Kamps. It turned out that the semen belonged to Kamps' boyfriend.

The prosecution nonetheless argued that "head hairs found on a bathrobe belt draped over Kamps' mutilated body ... were similar to Armstrong's" hair, and hey, superficial similarity should be good enough to sustain a murder conviction, right? Wrong. New DNA tests revealed that the hairs didn't come from Armstrong.

The prosecution's shakey case was always controversial, given the decision police made to "reconstruct" events by hypnotizing a witness, and the witness' subsequent flip-flopping testimony.

Atrios picks up on a question over at Romanesko: If Judith Miller never wrote about the Valerie Plame leak, how did the Government know she had information about it?

According to her lawyer Floyd Abrams, they've assumed it's because one of the white house officials told the grand jury he had talked to her about it.

Asked why prosecutors sought Miller's testimony when she never wrote a story about Plame, Times attorney Floyd Abrams said, "We don't know, but most likely somebody testified to the grand jury that he or she had spoken to Judy."

Who would it be? Most likely, in my opinion, Lewis Libby. Miller has said that even though her source gave a general waiver, she can't be sure it was not coerced and therefore wouldn't credit it. Also, the subpoenas she received only concerned communications with a single, identified person. From the DC Court of Appeals decision (pdf):

In the meantime, on August 12 and August 14, grand jury subpoenas were issued to Judith Miller, seeking documents and testimony related to conversations between her and a specified government official “occurring from on or about July 6, 2003, to on or about July 13, 2003, . . . concerning Valerie Plame Wilson (whether referred to by name or by description as the wife of Ambassador Wilson) or concerning Iraqi efforts to obtain uranium.”

See also, here and here.

by Last Night in Little Rock

Sunday evening, the LAPD SWAT team encountered a man with a gun who was allegedly using his 19 month old child as a human shield. According to the LAPD spokesman, the gunman fired on the officers and they fired back killing both the gunman and the child. CNN.com carried video of the story since yesterday along with its story here.

Bratton said the fatal shooting was only the second time a hostage had been killed since the department formed its SWAT team in 1967. In that time, SWAT officers have responded to 3,800 calls involving hostages or people barricaded inside buildings.

It was the second time in nine months that Los Angeles officers have fired on an assailant holding a hostage. In November, police shot a man who held a pregnant woman by the neck outside the Mexican Consulate. Officers pulled the woman away unharmed and the man later died.

A radical right religious group, American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) sent out this e-mail today asking people to sign a petition opposing a consensus candidate:

...it is for moments like this that the ACLJ exists ... to help you make your voice heard - opposing the views of left-wing organizations like the ACLU and People For the American Way. To protect men and women of faith in America. To present your views in a manner that will have a lasting impact for you and your family.

So today, we invite you to join us in our nationwide campaign to encourage President Bush as he makes this most important decision in the days to come ... and to ask him to stand his ground ... by signing our Petition to the President for NO CONSENSUS.

Arrests have been made in last week's London bombings. The BBC also reports that all four suspects were London natives. Sky News reports all four bombers died in the attacks.

Scotland Yard is conducting a press conference. Quick notes:

Three came from West Yorkshire area. Executed six warrants under Terrorism Act at three of the four men's homes. A detailed forensic exam will follow. All four arrived in London by train on the morning of July 7. They have seen CCTV footage showing them at King's Cross station at 8:30 am on that day. One man's family reported him missing. He was killed in the bus bomb.

Personal documents bearing names of three of four man have been found close to the sites of explosion. Missing man, his property was found on the bus. Property in name of second and third man found near two of the bombs.

Another man has been arrested in Yorkshire.

Your turn to pick the topics and speak your minds.

The New York Times succinctly recaps the Administration's prior statements on Karl Rove and the Valerie Plame leak:

In September 2003, Mr. McClellan said flatly that Mr. Rove had not been involved in disclosing Ms. Plame's name. Asked about the issue on Sept. 29, 2003, Mr. McClellan said he had "spoken with Karl Rove," and that it was "simply not true" that Mr. Rove had a role in the disclosure of her identity. Two weeks earlier, he had called suggestions that Mr. Rove had been involved "totally ridiculous." On Oct. 10, 2003, after the Justice Department opened its investigation, Mr. McClellan told reporters that Mr. Rove, Mr. Abrams and Mr. Libby had nothing to do with the leak.

Mr. McClellan and Mr. Bush have both made clear that leaking Ms. Plame's identity would be considered a firing offense by the White House. Mr. Bush was asked about that position most recently a little over a year ago, when he was asked whether he stood by his pledge to fire anyone found to have leaked the officer's name. "Yes," he replied, on June 10, 2004.

I don't expect President Bush to fire Rove. So, will Rove spare the President the embarassment and resign? And where is Fitgerald headed now?

If Rove gets indicted, I still think it won't be for outing Valerie Plame. I think it's more likely it will be for either perjury to the grand jury, making false statements to investigators or conspiracy to obstruct justice or violate the law against outing operatives.

Meanwhile, Judith Miller sits in jail protecting someone, probably Cheney's Chief of Staff Lewis Libby.

Salon has a new primer on the confusing case. The New York Times recaps prior White House briefings about the leaks. (So does Billmon.)

Will Karl Rove resign? Or continue to confidently maintain he's done nothing wrong and bank on escaping Fitzgerald's clutches? And if Rove goes down, who's going to go down with him? My bet is it will be Cheney's staff.