The Perils of Karl Rove

The Washington Post reports White House aides are debating whether Karl Rove should resign and that Rove is not out of Fitzgerald's cross-hairs.

Fitzgerald is considering charging Rove with making false statements in the course of the 22-month probe, and sources close to Rove -- who holds the titles of senior adviser and White House deputy chief of staff -- said they expect to know within weeks whether the most powerful aide in the White House will be accused of a crime.

Jonathan Alter at Newsweek writes that Rove's security clearance is in jeopardy. Jane at Firedoglake provides a perceptive analysis of these developments, including this quote about the use of the term "Official A" from the WAPO article:

That kind of pseudonym is often used by prosecutors to refer to an unindicted co-conspirator, or someone who faces the prospect of being charged. No other administration official is identified in this way in Fitzgerald's indictment.

Arch Pundit noted last week that former Illinois Governor George Ryan, prior to his indictment by Fitzgerald, was referred to as "Individual A" or "Official A" in the indictments of underlings.

From the AP August 27, 2003, Wednesday, BC cycle:

When asked, Fitzgerald would not comment on whether "Official A" was Ryan.

From the Chicago Daily Herald April 3, 2002, Wednesday All

But despite branding two of Ryan's former top aides and his campaign committee as corrupt, Fitzgerald would not say if the investigation will eventually reach Ryan. The vast majority of the corruption uncovered so far happened under his watch when he was secretary of state from 1990 until 1998. The governor has not been accused by prosecutors of any wrongdoing in the past, and Tuesday's indictments did not include him.

"I cannot answer that question," Fitzgerald said when asked about any Ryan involvement. "We cannot discuss people not charged in the indictment."

These news articles along with Fitzgerald's past habits suggest to me that Karl Rove will resign. Either it will be revealed in coming weeks that he made a plea bargain with Fitzgerald to plead guilty to making a false statement to investigators prior to his grand jury testimony in exchange for no jail time and not being charged with perjury before the grand jury, obstruction of justice or with leaking Valerie Plame Wilson's identity or CIA status -- or he will be indicted and fight because Fitzgerald won't agree to no jail time.

I suspect that Rove's 11th-hour disclosures that led Fitzgerald to hold off on indicting him involved something much more significant than his conversation with Adam Levine. If the new information provided by Rove is corroborated in the coming weeks and leads to or cements a charge against someone else, then Fitz may give him what he wants.

But once it is disclosed to the public that Rove either escaped being charged despite his dirty deeds and because of his cooperation against others, or ends up with a false statements charge himself, he is going to have to leave the White House.

I think that's why White House Aides are talking now about whether Rove should stay or go. They know Rove is not walking away from this investigation with a clean bill of health that absolves him of criminal conduct -- regardless of whether he is charged for it. The writing's on the wall.


< One Law Clerk's View of Alito | Thursday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Re: The Perils of Karl Rove (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:42 PM EST
    May I please be proven wrong, but I think this is where Bush draws a line in the sand. Bush losing Rove is like Ron Jeremy losing his dick. It would involve defeat, concessions, comeuppance and confusion on so many levels he just couldn't continue to function. "Karl's staying put and you can ALL go to hell!" I can hear it now............

    Re: The Perils of Karl Rove (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:43 PM EST
    Oh, I disagree, Steve. Georgie would light Karlie's head on fire if it served his narcissism. If the heat becomes too much, you can be SURE that no one is safe from Georgie's flailing efforts to flee like a greased pig, squealing to one and all about how it's a frame. The G-men (well, man) are closing in. Karlie will be joining Irvingie on the plank, toote suite. This whole assministration looks about ready to fall apart like a cheap pair of shoes. Georgie hates cheap shoes. I bet he really hates wearing striped pants, too.

    Re: The Perils of Karl Rove (none / 0) (#4)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:44 PM EST
    Steve Clemons (Washington Note) has a good post today about Scott McLellan almost feverishly dissembling, instead of issuing his usual direct denials, when asked in a press conference whether Rove will be shortly leaving the WH:
    Q: So Rove might leave is part of a, sort of, natural staff turnover? MR. McCLELLAN: See, this is a question trying to get me to play into all the speculation that's going on Q: Well, the Post story, are you -- I'm not hearing a denial here. MR. McCLELLAN: No, I'm telling you I'm not going to get into all the speculation. Karl Rove is the Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor to the President. He continues to carry out his duties. But that's why I pointed out that, in terms of the question came up in the context of any discussion of staff changes...

    Re: The Perils of Karl Rove (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    edgey - If Joe Wilson had been as close mouthed as McCellean when interviewed by David Corn back in July of '03, maybe none of this would have happened.. Oh, wait. This is what he wanted to happen. I keep forgetting the purpose of all this. I must keep repeating.. motive...motive..motive..

    Re: The Perils of Karl Rove (none / 0) (#6)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:45 PM EST
    Jim, Scooter's defense: Wilson made me lie!