(Rove) Was it a letter, a phone call, a fax or all of the above?

[sabra]

As usual, still more questions than answers

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washington/13cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1150257600&en=e40da3e03155858f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

<snip>

The decision by the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, announced in a letter to Mr. Rove's lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, lifted a pall that had hung over Mr. Rove who testified on five occasions to a federal grand jury about his involvement in the disclosure of an intelligence officer's identity.

In a statement, Mr. Luskin said, "On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove."

...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2070319&page=1

<snip>
Fitzgerald met with chief U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan before he notified Rove. Hogan has been overseeing the grand juries in the CIA leak case. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, declined comment. Asked if the CIA leak investigation is still continuing, Samborn said, "I'm not commenting on that as well at this time."

The prosecutor called Luskin late Monday afternoon to tell him he would not be seeking charges against Rove. Rove had just gotten on a plane, so his lawyer and spokesman did not reach him until he had landed in Manchester, N.H., where he was to give a speech to state GOP officials.

...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1203504,00.html

<snip>

Luskin had just received a fax from Patrick Fitzgerald, the special counsel in the case, saying that he was formally notifying Luskin that absent any unexpected developments, he does not anticipate seeking any criminal charges against Rove.

edit: added Time snip

[nolies32fouettes]

1. That's exactly why I compared it to a rollercoaster this morning

http://www.progressiveu.org/100931-rove-roller-coaster-derailed#comment-47831

and said not to believe it until Fitz ends it in his professional manner.

[myrna minx]

2. LeftNYC emailed the WP and NYTs for clarification...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2676054

[sabra]

4. thanks!

[myrna minx]

6. Interesting that ABC states that it was a phone call too.

Any attorney would want something in writing.

[sabra]

7. check out post #5, it's AP via ABC...

[myrna minx]

11. John Solomon. Very interesting. n/t

[LeftNYC]

3. yup. Post reporters deny anything about a letter

I dont believe this is a "conspiracy". I just want to know if there is some written proof. Also, if there is it may go into detail about Rove's involvement.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. Sabra!! Check this out!!

I finally went to the AP piece to go through word by word. The first thing that caught my eye was the byline: John Solomon. That rang a bell so, I googled http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=John+Solomon+AP+Writer. The top return is Americablog's http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/05/more-on-john-solomon-associated-press.html "Monday, May 29, 2006

More on John Solomon, the Associated Press writer who wrote the bogus hit piece on Harry Reid today
by John in DC - 5/29/2006 09:25:00 PM


You might recall that this isn't Mr. Solomon's first brush with truthiness. From AMERICAblog last July, 2005 we learn of John Solomon's untrue reporting about Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson:
The Associated Press totally botched a rather significant part of the Rove-Plame story today.

Basically, AP is now supposedly quoting Wilson as saying his wife was NOT an undercover agent when Rove outed her. Here's what AP wrote today:"

Things that make you go, Hmmmm.

Then, I checked your links...Yep! The ABC News is an AP credit. AP's not credited in the NYT, but the sources and spokespersons are the same. It also seems to be primarily a complete rehash of their reporting to this date.

Looks suspiciously like the *cough* good *cough* Mr. Solomon's piece is going to news outlets at lightning speed.

[stop the bleeding]

8. Very interesting research NN

we need a statement from Fitz if he is done with Rover, this spin is getting out of control

[myrna minx]

9. Fantastic catch.

*This* is why I love DU. :hi: John Solomon....hmmmmmm.

[sabra]

10. nice find...

as I said more questions than answers :-)

[Nictuku]

12. Good Work!

[patcox2]

28. Gosh, this Solomon is almost as sketchy as Leopold himself!

You know, Leopold, that reporter who got fired from a couple of jobs for makign stuff up, and has some serious mental health issues too.

[newspeak]

33. is AP owned by

Loony Moonie? Thought he owned the Washington Times and bought out AP.

[hang a left]

40. I believe it is UPI

[sabra]

13. Update added Time snip to OP

[Norquist Nemesis]

14. The last one? A freaking FAX????

That falls under the "not believable" category for official communication. Luskin might be able to trace the origin of the fax back to Tony Snow's computer. Just sayin...

[sabra]

15. even weirder

:crazy:

[jsamuel]

16. wow, good work... hmmmmmm.....

[emulatorloo]

17. Kicking and Nominating -- Great Catch, Sabra n/t

[jsamuel]

18. crossposted at DailyKos to get this to light

thanks Sabra!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/13/135547/914

[sabra]

19. kewl, thank you for doing this...

[stop the bleeding]

21. yep we need to get to the bottom of this crap

researchers are the best thing going on the blogs right now

[robinlynne]

20. good one.

umm is right.

[patcox2]

22. Fantasies, desperate fantasies.

There's nothing inconsistent. In the process of transmitting a document of this importance, a document that was probably discussed dozens of times by the parties before being produced and transmitted, they would have talked about it "Hey, Bob, I am writing that letter memorializing our discussion), faxed it ("Where's my letter?" "Don't worry, its done, I am faxing a copy.") and mailed it and also probably hand delivered it as well.

Thats the way lawyers do things. Thats the way businesspeople do things.

Grasping at straws is not even the word anymore.

[Hugin]

23. Speaking of "producing"...

I'd like to take a gander at said letter/phone call/fax.

Just for ol' time's sake.

Naturally, they won't have any problem producing it.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hugin]

25. Nah, I'd just like a framed picture of such an important document...

So, it can be hung next to that terrorist what's-his-names picture.

I'm sure that wouldn't be any problem.

[Qutzupalotl]

38. It's been "sealed".

I'd like to see that letter/fax/while-you-were-out memo too.

[Clark2008]

43. I think the argument is, "Why haven't we seen the letter"

more than whether it was faxed, mailed or conveyed electronically.

I'd like to see the letter, too. When I was reporting, I wouldn't have reported this story until I had a copy of the letter I could show my editors - a copy of an official document, not just a "letter," too.

I, personally, think Rove is in the clear - whether he's turning evidence or Fitzgerald couldn't prove his involvement is something for later stories - but I wouldn't just trust the word of Rove's attorney without the official, stamped and/or notarized letter from Fitzgerald saying as such.

[Rex]

24. A letter, fax, phonecall, what is the difference to a pathological liar?

Look, just BELIEVE the MSM and move on. The fact that three different MSM blowholes reported three separate delivery systems is a technicality. Nothing to see here. Move along.

[AndyA]

26. "...absent unexpected developments...does not anticipate..."

Everything could change, though. This is not a guarantee that charges won't be filed, just at this time they don't think so. Happens all the time, then charges do get filed as more evidence becomes known.

The source of this news is hardly credible, in fact the source is questionable. I'll believe it when I see it, and even then I still think there's more to come from Fitzgerald.

[Hugin]

27. Yeah, I'll believe it when I see a letter signed by Fitzgerald.

Even then... Maybe the Rovers would stoop to forgery.

[stop the bleeding]

29. Now Luskin has been informed via the Pony Express and Morse Code n/t

[Marie26]

30. FWIW

Attorneys will usually send a letter to confirm important oral conversations (so the other person can't deny it later ;)). First, they'll send an unofficial fax & then follow it up w/an official letter sent through the mail. This is such an important announcement that I could see Fitzgerald using all three methods to notify Rove's attorney.

[patcox2]

31. Umm, letters are sent by fax, so you really only have 2 choices.

You are being very misleading suggesting that there is anything unusual about getting a letter by fax, or that to say "I got a letter" and "I got a fax" is in any way inconsistent.

Unless of course, one is suffering cognitive dissonance. Then I suppose there's a huge difference from that perspective.

[Pale Blue Dot]

32. There is something I have not seen addressed

What good would it do, legally or otherwise, for Luskin to make this claim? It wouldn't influence Fitzgerald in any way. If proven false, any political gain would be short lived.

I hate Rove. I'll never trust him. But I can't see any motive to lie about this.

[Marie26]

34. Me either.

Which is why it doesn't really matter how it was sent.

[jsamuel]

35. Discredit people who were leaked that he has already been indicted

[Pale Blue Dot]

36. But if Rove IS indicted, THEY get discredited.

It just makes no logical sense to do that.

[jsamuel]

37. not if it was sealed and then lost/thrown out by Gonzales

it would never be made public

its a stretch

[theboss]

42. Gonzales stole it from the federal courthouse?

Wouldn't Fitzgerald be upset about this?

[jsamuel]

44. hehe, yeah, sure, but he couldn't say anything about it without breaking

the law, so he wouldn't (theoretically)

I remember someone saying that Gonzales showed up at the courthouse May 12th (the same day Leopold said was the day Rove was indicted).

The only way that both Leopold AND Luskin are correct is if...

Fitz brought an indictment (May 12th), he told Rove/Luskin, it was sealed, Gonzales shot it down/refused to sign it, Fitz had no choice but to let Rove go and gave him a letter on June 12th to tell him so.

[Qutzupalotl]

45. It makes Rove's last days of freedom easier / more fun / etc.

Not saying it happened, but that would be a motive. Luskin could make up the Fitzgerald letter story, refuse to show it, and Fitzgerald can't say a damned thing about it. Nobody else could, either.

Bluffing Cheney while turning states evidence would be another scenario.

I don't trust Rove for a second and I DAMNED sure don't trust his lawyer, Democrat or no.

[Pale Blue Dot]

46. C'mon.

A lawyer's job isn't to make their client's last days of freedom "more fun". You can't really believe that, can you?

[Qutzupalotl]

47. I didn't say I believed it, but if you have enough money...

a lawyer could do anything you wanted.

IMO, the states evidence angle is more likely.

Still...I want to see the letter. Fitzgerald can't comment either way.

[Roland99]

39. He got a phone call to expect a fax announcing a letter would arrive.

[IsIt1984Yet]

41. ...via email.