Rove Aides Queried About Matt Cooper Testimony

The New York Times reports Rove aides Susan Ralston and Israel Hernandez were questioned about Matthew Cooper's grand jury testimony during their grand jury stint last Friday - and the telephone call Cooper said he made to Karl Rove on July 11, which wasn't entered on Rove's phone log.

In an article in Time last month about his grand jury appearance, Mr. Cooper wrote that he had telephoned the White House and been transferred to Mr. Rove's office. "I believe a woman answered the phone and said words to the effect that Rove wasn't there," Mr. Cooper wrote, "or was busy before going on vacation. But then I recall she said something like 'hang on,' and I was transferred to him."

Mr. Cooper wrote that Mr. Rove told him that Ms. Wilson had worked at the C.I.A. and had been responsible for sending her husband to Africa. But Mr. Cooper added that Mr. Rove did not identify Ms. Wilson by name or suggest that he knew of her status as a covert officer.

Rove supporters say Fitzpatrick is probably tying up loose ends. It sounds like they supported Cooper's version.

At one point, the aides were asked why Mr. Cooper's call to Mr. Rove was not entered in Mr. Rove's office telephone logs. There was no record of the call, the person who has been briefed said, because Mr. Cooper did not call Mr. Rove directly, but was transferred to his office from a White House switchboard.

But it wouldn't be a "loose end" unless there was a discrepancy somewhere - is it between something Rove said and something Cooper said?

< Was Tenet a Source for Novak? | Ohio Election Results In: Way Closer Than Expected >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Rove Aides Queried About Matt Cooper Testimony (none / 0) (#1)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:51 PM EST
    As much as I love a great conspiracy this one seems to be fizzling out. If there was some hard evidence the Summer silly season press would be running away with the headlines and the opposite seems to be happening. Perhaps this will turn out to be the silver bullet for the Bush detractors but somehow I doubt it. I think perhaps wishful thinking won't substitute for hard evidence in this case no matter how much the Left flogs it. But I may be wrong.

    Re: Rove Aides Queried About Matt Cooper Testimony (none / 0) (#2)
    by The Heretik on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:51 PM EST
    I do think we will see involvement from many of the key players in the Bush adminstration. The question won't be who is involved, but rather who isn't.

    Re: Rove Aides Queried About Matt Cooper Testimony (none / 0) (#3)
    by jimcee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:51 PM EST
    As I said, 'I love a great conspiracy' but I just don't feel this one is sticking to Bush. Besides if the preceding charges against Bush et al haven't destroyed him the Plame case seems to be small potatoes in comparison. War criminal vs 'has a friend that is a gossip'. I just don't see where this is going to get the anti-Bushies in a favourable light in the public eye. After a while the complaintants seem to become cranks to the casual viewer which makes the Left seem more paranoid than they really are. Between this and the Bolton thing the Left has gotten a bit frenetic lately. If things are as bad as you think then time will prove you right... or maybe no one will notice the difference either way. I know my life doesn't change with the political winds. So sit back and enjoy the blood sport we all call politics.<em>

    I think you're right jimcee. I don't see this "sticking to Bush," but I do think we're going to see, at the very least, some indictments for perjury and/or obstruction of justice, and this may very well stick to republicans in the 2006 and 2008 elections. I also agree that this probably won't "get the anti-Bushies in a favourable light in the public eye." I don't think it's going to do much at all in terms of public perception of the anti-Bushies (although we'll have to include the CIA as part of the anti-Bushies if that's what we're calling people who are outraged by the Plame case). But it may well make a very unfavorable impression on the public when Bush has to decide whether he's going to fire those who have been indicted or only those who are convicted.