WP: Why -- and in what way -- the timing of Luskin-Novak

[Bumblebee]

conversation is important, and here Novak's testimony does NOT help:

It appears the timing of the Luskin-Novak conversation is crucial to the Rove defense. Novak said she does not recall the precise date but said she talked with Luskin in January, March and May 2004. She wrote that she believed the talk probably took place in May.

A lawyer close to the case said Luskin has contended the conversation happened before Rove's first appearance before the grand jury in February 2004, when he testified he did not recall discussing Plame with Cooper. Luskin refused to comment. A spokesman for the Rove defense said in a statement that Rove is cooperating and that private discussions with the prosecutor will not be discussed publicly.

One possible explanation of why the date is so important is that Luskin could contend it would have been foolish for Rove to try to cover up his role when he knew -- as a result of Novak's disclosure to Luskin -- that a number of people knew he had talked to Cooper and that it probably would soon become public.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/11/AR2005121100400_2.html

[Kagemusha]

1. So what, Luskin told Rove about it, right?

So what's the story here - according to Rove's lawyer, Viveca knew that he'd talked to Cooper, but Rove decided not to believe this and stuck to his guns and said he remembered no such conversation?

That's rather odd isn't it?

[Bumblebee]

2. It's very tortured but I remember reading in the WP earlier that Luskin

was hoping Novak would say they talked prior to Rove's first GJ appearance -- and not after it already became obvious that Fitz was putting the pressure on Cooper to testify. I am sure he has his reasons -- what's important for us, hopefully, is that Novak did not quite "oblige."

[Kagemusha]

3. Ok, I think I get it...

This is to say "Rove firmly believed" because he heard he was the source for Cooper and STILL didn't believe it, rather than, Rove hears he is the source, knows that IF Cooper testifies (which was being fought tooth and nail, Cooper was ready to go to jail, etc) that Cooper could identify Rove as the source, and, knowing this, willfully lies to delay possible charges as long as possible and hope Cooper never has to testify at all.

Isn't this double or nothing? Either Rove had such a faulty memory that even being told by his lawyer word at TIME was different didn't jog his memory, or Rove has to be guilty of BOTH perjury AND obstruction of justice?

[Bumblebee]

4. Yes, I think that was his plan, and with Novak's dates -- March or May, it

simply does not work, and that is why Fitz impaneled a new jury.