home

Raw Story: Rove and the Hadley E-Mail

Raw Story reports that Fitzgerald is focused on the July 11, 2003 e-mail Karl Rove sent Stephen Hadley about Rove's call with Matthew Cooper. Did Karl Rove hide or purposely conceal the Stephen Hadley e-mail after Attorney General Gonzales ordered the production of e-mails and after the February 6 deadline for the White House to turn over subpoenaed contacts with reporters?

Rove's alleged failure to disclose his conversations with Cooper and Novak and the fact that he didn't turn over the Hadley email on two separate occasions is the reason he's been in Fitzgerald's crosshairs and may end up being indicted, people close to the investigation said.

It's also the reason Fitzgerald had grown suspicious at the time that Rove may have hid or destroyed evidence related to his role in the leak, they said, adding that Fitzgerald may have already been aware of the existence of the email, perhaps even obtaining a copy from a witness or another White House official, and waited to see if Rove would cite it or his conversations with Cooper in his grand jury testimony.

Raw Story connects the e-mail to Luskin's reported insistence that his tip from Time Reporter Viveca Novak occurred in February rather than in March or May as she testified:

It's important for Rove to assert that the meeting took place that month, otherwise he doesn't have a good defense for why the email he sent to Hadley wasn't found the second time.

....If Luskin and Novak did meet in March or May and discuss Rove being Cooper's source it doesn't address why the Hadley email didn't turn up in January, when the White House was subpoenaed. That's why Luskin has been insistent that he and Novak met in February, people close to the case said, in order to explain how he was able to find the Hadley email just as the White House was responding to the subpoena.

Put another way,

"What Luskin is doing is trying to say that he found the email after his conversation with Ms. Novak but before the White House turned over evidence of administration contacts with journalists," one attorney close to the case said. "He understands that it would be quite difficult to explain to the prosecutor how this email miraculously turned up in either March or May but not in January or February. That's why it appears he is stating that he spoke with Ms. Novak in February."

Questions: When did Rove first tell investigators or the grand jury he spoke with Bob Novak on July 8 or 9 about Wilson's wife? We know he didn't tell them about Cooper in October, 2003 and February, 2004, but there have been conflicting reports as to when he told them about speaking with Novak.

Did Hadley or the White House turn over the e-mail in October, 2003 or in February of 2004? Has Fitz had it all along?

< Senate Rejects Patriot Act | Tom Delay Supboenas Grand Jurors for Misconduct Hearing >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Raw Story: Rove and the Hadley E-Mail (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:06 PM EST
    I have read the Raw Story report a couple of times and I can't follow their logic about why Luskin should insist on the earlier date. Perhaps he is gave the earlier date because he kept better notes than Viveca Novak. This online Time Magazine article, published Jan. 2, 2004 may offer a clue as to who is right. The first paragraph reads: “ FBI investigators looking into the criminal leak of a CIA agent’s identity have asked Bush Administration officials including senior political adviser Karl Rove to release reporters from any confidentiality agreements regarding conversations about the agent. If signed, the single-page requests made over the last week would give investigators new ammunition for questioning reporters who have so far, according to those familiar with the case, not disclosed the names of administration officials who divulged that Valerie Plame, wife of former ambassador Joe Wilson, worked for the CIA. “ Time I noticed three things. The article was published in early January 2004, it was co-written by Viveca Novak and it specifically mentions Karl Rove in the first paragraph. This article could have been what caused Luskin to sit down with Novak for drinks and “go fishing” to find out what she knew about a Rove - Cooper connection. If this was the initiating factor, than the January date that Luskin supposedly recalled would make more sense than Viveca Novak's recollection of March or May.

    Re: Raw Story: Rove and the Hadley E-Mail (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:07 PM EST
    Here are the press accounts on the Hadley email.
    Why didn't the Rove e-mail surface earlier? The lawyer says it's because an electronic search conducted by the White House missed it because the right "search words" weren't used. Newsweek 10/17/05 issue
    The e-mail was written from Rove's government account, which investigators searched early in the inquiry. It is unclear why the e-mail was not discovered at that time. 12/03/05 WAPO
    It is not known publicly what steps Luskin took after hearing the information from Novak. Nor is it publicly known whether Fitzgerald's investigators had the e-mail all along and simply overlooked it or whether the White House had not given it to the prosecutor. AP 12/11/05
    Whether or not Fitzgerald knew in late January or early February 2004 about the existence of the email Rove sent to Hadley remains unknown. Rawstory 12/13/05
    Fitzgerald may have already been aware of the existence of the email, perhaps even obtaining a copy from a witness or another White House official Rawstory 12/16/05


    Apparently the WH used an electronic search and then gave printed copies of the email to investigators.
    The lawyer says it's because an electronic search conducted by the White House missed it because the right "search words" weren't used. Newsweek 10/17/05
    The White House turned over call logs relating to the case, along with stacks of printed e-mails, at the request of federal investigators. WaPo 7/15/05
    The 9/30/03 document request did not specify Cooper. The 1/04 GJ subpoena did specifically name Cooper. Rove had to know the Hadley email would be picked up in an electronic search. The details of the original document request and the 1/04 GJ subpoenas can be found here.

    Re: Raw Story: Rove and the Hadley E-Mail (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:07 PM EST
    Meant to say Rove had to know the Hadley email would be picked up in an electronic search when Cooper's name was used after the January subpoena.

    Re: Raw Story: Rove and the Hadley E-Mail (none / 0) (#5)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:07:07 PM EST
    i don't mean to be picky or anything, or hint at any sense of boredom with this incredibly compelling issue of the day but, could we just kill rove and be done with it? the man is dull, beyond words. i could eat a pad of workpapers, and barf up something far more interesting than he is.