What Does Fitzgerald Want From Viveca Novak?

Jane and Reddhed at FiredogLake provide some intriguing theories on why Patrick Fitzgerald has subpoenaed Time correspondent Viveca Novak.

Reddhed writes that Fitzgerald may be trying to pierce Rove's attorney-client relationship with Luskin through statements Luskin made to Novak with Rove's consent.

Jane recaps some theories provided by their readers: Luskin may have been using Novak to pass information to Cooper in an attempt to influence his testimony; and this one:

Let's not forget in the beginning there was a meeting of the Cabal to plot strategy to discredit Wilson and get revenge via his wife, all to protect their lies for going to war. A conspiracy of intent. A second conspiracy to cover their tracks with reporters carrying the burden of revelations. A third conspiracy of the Cabal to spin the story to cover up the previous two conspiracies. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE AT NOW---POSSIBLE "targeted direct attempts at communication" BY LUSKIN AND ROVE.

Here's how I'm seeing it based on information so far:

I think Fitzgerald is after something that appeared in Novak's Time articles or radio and tv interview transcripts that either belies Rove's claim that he didn't remember talking to Cooper before discovering the Hadley e-mail or that relates to the timing of the Rove and Luskin's discovery of the Hadley e-mail.

It may have to do with whether Rove offered to recant his earlier testimony to the grand jury before or after knowing that Time Magazine was going to turn over Cooper's notes and e-mails. If Rove only offered to go back to the grand jury after he found out that Cooper or Time were going to out him, then recantation isn't available as a defense.

Another possibility along these lines: Perhaps Fitzgerald wants to know what Novak told Luskin about Time and Cooper's intentions and the substance of Cooper's conversations with Rove -- as opposed to merely what Luskin told Novak. [Update: Tom Maguire has more on this.]

Does anyone think the timing is suspect? Woodward gives the first account of why his source came clean to Viveca Novak of Time rather than the Washington Post. Then Novak gets subpoenaed. Is Woodward the cause of Novak's subpoena?

< WAPO Reporters Embarassed by Woodward | Viveca, Luskin and Fitzgerald: Do Dates Tell Us Anything? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Re: What Does Fitzgerald Want From Viveca Novak? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Tom Maguire on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:28 PM EST
    Does anyone think the timing is suspect? Does anyone not think so? But I am utterly stumped on a connection, unless the Luskin story is just a smokescreen. And that said, I can't say that it ocurred to me weeks ago that Luskin's leaks to treporters, or their questions to him, might shed light on how and why the Hadley email was discovered. Maybe folks were staring at her byline on the Woodward piece and the penny just dropped. Hard to believe, though.

    Re: What Does Fitzgerald Want From Viveca Novak? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:29 PM EST
    Fitzgerald seems to be looking for the greasy fist of evidence needed to impale Rove's corrupt a**. I sense he's really looking hard, has strong and serious suspicions, and will leave few if any stones unturned. Doesn't even want the PEBBLES to go unturned. Whether this'll mean he gets to fry his fish is antother matter, but it won't be for a lack of keeping his line in the water.