Source: Wayne Madsen Report
It looks like several blogs that ran the Friday Rove indictment piece may have been about 90% right.
The only facts that were amiss where the fact that the meeting at Patton and Boggs law firm only lasted 1-2 hours in length, not the 15 as reported.
Fitzgerald did meet with Rove's attorney on Friday and basically, Rove and his attorney Robert Luskin were informed that Rove is to be indicted Friday and Rove Attorney Luskin has moved into the subject class of the investigation.
Rove attorney Robert Luskin may be in serious legal troubles as there is proof he may have knowingly committed "obstruction of justice" as an officer of the court.
The 411 on the real story here:
According to sources within the Patton and Boggs law firm, Karl Rove was present at the law firm's building on M Street. WMR was told by a credible source that a Patton and Boggs attorney confirmed that Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove.
Contrary to other reports, some of which may have emanated from the Rove camp in order to create diversions and smokescreens, the meetings at Patton and Boggs did not last 15 hours nor was a 24-hour notice of intent to indict delivered to Rove. In the Scooter Libby case last October, after the Grand Jury decided to indict Libby on Friday, October 21 and the Attorney General personally heard the decision the same day at a meeting with the jury, the actual indictment was issued the following Friday, October 28. Several sources have told WMR that an announcement concerning the indictment of Rove will be made on Friday, May 19 generally following the same scenario from October 28, 2005 -- the posting of the indictment on the Special Prosecutor's web site followed by a press conference at Main Justice.
WMR was also told by a credible source that part of the reason for Fitzgerald's visit to Patton and Boggs was to inform Rove attorney Luskin that he has moved into the category of a "subject" of the special prosecutor's investigation as a result of a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, in which Novak told Luskin that Rove was a source for Time's Matt Cooper. The special prosecutor, who has prosecuted one defense attorney in the Hollinger case, is reportedly investigating whether Luskin, as an officer of the court, may have violated laws on obstruction of justice.
A follow-up from the original source, the Truthout.org website again showing they had the story right.
THE 24 HOUR THING
We reported that Patrick Fitzgerald had, "instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order...." That does not mean that at the end of that 24-hour period, Fitzgerald is obliged to hold a press conference and make an announcement. It just means that he has given Rove a 24-hour formal notification. Fitzgerald is not obliged to make an announcement at any point; he does so at his own discretion, and not if it compromises his case. So we're all stuck waiting here. Grab some coffee.
We can now report, however, that we have additional, independent sources that refute those denials by Corallo and Luskin. While we had only our own sources to work with in the beginning, additional sources have now come forward and offered corroboration to us.
We have been contacted by at least three reporters from mainstream media -- network level organizations -- who shared with us off-the-record confirmation and moral support. When we asked why they were not going public with this information, in each case they expressed frustration with superiors who would not allow it.
I say "job well done" to the blogs that ran with the story, and "boo" to the blogs that fell into the Karl Rove spin of lies.
When big-name political blogs like Wonkette, Americablog, and DailyKos are spinned by the Rove team so easily, and then they chose to self-censor themselves, I often ask, how different are you from the big media that you often put down?
Example of the attacks against blogs that ran the story:
Wonkette gets taken for a ride thanks to Karl Rove.
ROVE STILL NOT INDICTED PROBABLY DESPITE WEBSITE
Remember yesterday, when we evinced skepticism about the Truthout "report" claiming Karl Rove had been indicted (the "report" which some of you continue to send us)?
We were proved right, dammit! Ahead of the curve! MUST CREDIT WONKETTE FOR SKEPTICISM.
The Wall Street Journal has a piece today about how certain blogs like to throw shit at the wall and see what sticks. Truthout seems to be waging a campaign of competing reality in which Rove had a 15-hour meeting on Friday and was indicted this weekend, in the hopes of stirring up real reporters to confirm it, which reporters then try very hard to do -- sort of wagging the dog, but the metaphor collapses when you remember that bloggers have never met the dog, just seen it on tv.
DailyKos gets taken for a ride too:
STOP IT, YER KILLING US! to Truthout.org. Their latest update on Karl Rove's imminent indictment has the same effect on our psyche as Pavlov's bell. The latest: apparently they've received independent confirmation from traditional-media types. C'mon, Fitz, pull the trigger...I think our champagne is starting to turn.
CHEERS to edukashun. 153 years ago today, Massachusetts ruled that all school-age children must attend school. Crazy activist liberals---will they never stop?
And good old John at Americablog finishes the trifecta of major liberal blogs that rode the Karl Rove spin machine.
Wall Street Journal bashes liberal blogs for embracing "Rove indicted" story. Problem is, we didn't.
by John in DC -- 5/16/2006 01:46:00 PM
Salon's War Room does a great analysis of how the liberal blogosphere did NOT embrace the story from a few days ago about how Karl Rove was supposedly secretly indicted. While the Wall Street Journal bashes liberal blogs for running with unconfirmed stories, in fact, the story itself didn't come from a blog at all, and what's more, most of the top liberal blogs, this one included, refused to link to the story because we questioned whether it was true. Liberal blogosphere member Peter Daou even went so far as to openly criticize the "Rove has been indicated" piece just a few days ago. I guess the WSJ must have missed that.
So, in fact, the liberal blogosphere showed that we already police ourselves and already have a pretty well-developed sense of journalistic ethics.
I hate when facts gets in the way of a perfectly good story.
Please tell me, fellow bloggers, how you are different from the mindless tools who work at CNN, FOX News, and CBS? You may be closer to traditional media than you really want to admit.
The lack of running a good truthful story and being easily misdirected by the Rove team just shows it.
[Wayne Madsen Report], [Karl Rove indictment story], [Wonkette], [Americablog], [DailyKos], [liberal bloggers], [did some bloggers fall into Karl Rove's spin machine?]
No comments:
Post a Comment