
I heard Jim VandeHei was on Countdown pimping a barn burner of a story in the WaPo tonight that was going to rip the lid of this pig and exonerate Karl Rove from the legal miasma of TraitorGate. So I cancelled my plans for the evening, bullied the dogs into a hasty poop and settled down with some popcorn and my "refresh" button:
Viveca Novak, who has written intermittently about the leak case for Time, has been asked to provide sworn testimony to Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald in the next few weeks after Rove attorney Robert Luskin told Fitzgerald about a conversation he had with her, the two sources said.
Oh this is getting good. I feel a heat rash coming on from all the excitement.
[A] person familiar with the matter said Luskin cited his conversations with Novak in persuading Fitzgerald not to indict Rove in late October, when the prosecutor brought perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges against Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
"This is what caused [Fitzgerald] to hold off on charging" Rove, the source said.
B…b…but…(lip quivering, eyes watering)…I thought that was Adam Levine?
Luskin presented evidence, including details of his own conversations with Novak, to Fitzgerald at a secret meeting at a downtown law office shortly before Libby was indicted on Oct. 28, according to a source familiar with the case.
So…Fitzgerald’s been what, waiting in line for Stones tickets for the past month?
It also shows that Rove, who, like Libby, was dragged into the case for talking to reporters, is now hoping that a reporter will help pull him out.
Excuse me, did he just use the word "dragged?" Kinda like John Gotti got "dragged" into court because Sammy the Bull got chatty.
Luskin has worked behind the scenes to convince Fitzgerald that Rove is guilty of nothing more than a faulty memory.
Again, funny choice of words — "behind the scenes" — for someone who has to be pulled off the stage with a hook.
Time has not disclosed what information Viveca Novak might have that is relevant to the case and Rove’s defense. In a brief article Sunday, the magazine reported that she has been asked to discuss conversations with Luskin starting in May 2004, when she first began to report on the leak case.
What, were "sources familiar with the case" not familiar with the fact that Viveca Novak wrote articles on the case on January 2, January 12 and January 22, 2004? I guess not.
Time has not objected to Fitzgerald’s questioning Novak. The magazine waged a lengthy legal battle to keep Fitzgerald’s grand jury from questioning Cooper before acquiescing earlier this year. Unlike Cooper, Viveca Novak is not seeking to protect a confidential source and was not subpoenaed to testify.
Well it does make a certain kind of sense that Luskin is sending Fitzgerald on another goat rope of the Adam Levine variety and providing Viveca Novak with a waiver to testify. It would explain why Time isn’t getting all hinky over it. It does not, however, explain the timing. VandeHei’s spinners sources seem desperate to prove that there is "nothing new" here, we’re in "loose ends" territory.
Kind of amusing, really. The "sources" lie freely knowing that Fitz is leak-proof, and reporters keep printing the lies only to have their asses handed to them days later when another camp leaks and spins back. The reporters never bust their "sources" in order to preserve the privilege of being lied to. Fitzgerald finds new ammunition with every leak and the reporters just wind up looking like prize chumps.
(In VandeHei’s defense, he does quote "another person familiar with the conversations" who said that all this does "not appear to significantly alter the case." It keeps safely him out of Deborah Orrin territory anyway.)
If Luskin is dragging in Viveca Novak to substantiate something he said, then it seems likely Fitzgerald has some piece of evidence her testimony is intended to counter. Something within the timeframe must indicate that Rover wasn’t being completely honest with either the FBI or the grand jury, and they hope to prove that if Luskin was out there selling his own client’s special brand of bs then Fitzgerald should buy it, too.
Lord, if only Fitz were a red state fundie with an 8th grade education whose heartfelt desire was to nuke Syria and have sex with farm animals Rover’s job experience would be ever so much more applicable.
Update: Jeralyn says "I’m just waiting now for Bob Woodward to pop back up in the story." Agreed.
And Arianna is now calling Woodward the "dumb blonde of American Journalism." You have to feel for VandeHei a bit. It must be rough when your biggest story to date is about how your paper’s own superstar fucked you over and wouldn’t talk to you about it.
(graphic courtesy The Heretik)



86 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Whew…finally got through this whole thread, hours after starting and many interruptions later.
And J. Thomason, must say, best comment this thread. Beautifully succinct and so very zen. Maybe Fitz used the wrong sport for his analogies in the Libby indictment press conference.
If I may be allowed, here, somewhat on topic, even with another thread out there about former Rep. Duke.
Back in Bartlett practicing law with Bob Jarvis I learned alot about how to litigate. In the day Bob had been a fullback at Messick High and later a railroad investigator down in Jackson, Mississippi. He had a legal career representing ordinary people, some pretty low on the social rung in Memphis. Race was not an issue and often he would have to face prestige defense lawyers, with french cuffs and shoes that shined like black mirrors, lawyers who were paid to make an issue of just about anything and Bob would tell them something like this: “listen, you can run your end arounds and dipsy-doodles, but I am a fullback and I am coming right at you, right up the middle and if I just get one yard this time, we are going to come right at you again with the same thing.” So much of defense in litigation where there is nothing else substantive is about misdirection and attrition but a focused simple direct case, in my experience, is very effective even if the immediate result is three yards and a cloud of dust and a lot of clock is consumed. Thats the price of progress.
And this analogy as to method, which as I have said was a great and useful lesson to me, is surely something that is not lost on the Rugby player Fitzgerald, even if he never has scrummed on the South Memphis fields of honor.
Even in what we know the theory of the case is emerging in a pretty clear direct way:
1) Rove says to Cooper: “I have already said too much. It will all be declassified soon.”
2) Rove tells Ralston not to log call to Cooper.
3) Cheney discloses Plame’s covert status to Libby in early June 2003.
4) Libby lies about his knowledge and activities.
5) Woodward makes clear that the scope of the knowledge is not limited in the administration with his gaurded disclosure of Mr. X.
6) Much of what is known points to a conspiracy that has an attempted constructed deniability built around a “1st Amendement” defense. Remember Bush: “You people do a very good job of protecting your sources” or something like that.
7) This is not to mention that much of what Fitzgerald knows about Cheney, Hadley, etc. has not been aired regularly in the press as Luskin has been vigorously hawking his dog and pony show as the only act in town. Its not true. There is much more happening.
Three yards and a cloud of dust gets it done.
arbo,
If you’re still here….dropped you a Patriot reference in a post yesterday and you may have missed it. As the Tuna used to say, “you are what your record says you are”. Brady had his worst game as a pro and they just cannot overcome all these injuries. They miss both Weis and Crennell too. They don’t get past the first round IMHO.
What a fraud Brent Bozell is, I happened to click past that segment last night. As Bozell was spewing his horseshit the screen crawl previewed their next segment: Virgin Mary statue shedding tears of blood?
Why does Scarborough still have a shnow? Someone please explain this.
Click.
One thing that is beginning to leap out of this blog and its comment section is that the MSM is in the pocket of the Republican Party. Before I am deafened with a resounding “duh!”, let me say that a) that’s not the way it’s supposed to be (Article something of the Constitution), and b) I simply don’t believe it’s evident to the populace at large.
When one factors in that the blogosphere is at least half-populated with Republican ringers, it makes for an exceedingly opaque world for the majority of voters.
A guy like Fitzgerald is really something else in this environment. He doesn’t talk to the press except for one press conference. Luskin talks all the time. And Luskin’s only problem with getting his message across is talking loudly enough so that the reporter who’s on his/her knees in front of him sucking away can hear clearly.
Clinton was impeached for lying about a blow-job? This country is in really, really bad trouble.
new thread (not paid for by defense contractors)
New thread.
Oh, please…oh, please, bust the child Queen of the Oranges Katherine Harris.
Another good story at TPM by Larry Johnson:
Brent Bozell, Chicken?
“The reporters never bust their ’sources’ in order to preserve the privilege of being lied to.”
That pretty much sums up the value of “access” journalism today. Woodward is just the latest assclown in a long line of assclowns. Hope those books sell, you sellout.
way OT, but it’s late here in jp….
great TPM by joshua just up…he’s got some fine connecting going on, linking the thus-gone “duke” cunningham to, among others, my personal favorite for perkiest republican, the larvly, lurvly ms katherine harris –
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c…..007125.php
wouldn’t them perkies be better employed in some podunk s. florida mall, just pushing clinique products or something?
The VanderHei article is CRAP…plain and simple….He is a stenographer for the Bushies…..
Holy chit! Wilkerson all but accusing Cheney of war crimes on BBCNews:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wor…..480638.stm
…from his mouth to dog’s ears.
OT, but I thought only 5-6 contractors had been killed in Iraq. This story from the Asian Times says 280 were killed…..
America’s unsung war dead
By David Isenberg
When America marked the death last month of the 2,000th US service member in Iraq, many commented that this was a meaningless milestone made up by the media and no more important than any other death figures.
They were in fact right, but not for the reason they thought. America actually reached the milestone of 2,000 long before. The reason, however, nobody commented about it was that these fatalities came from America’s other army; that of the private sector. As of November 14, at least 280 coalition contractors have been killed.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/M…..0Ak03.html
if the conversation that Novak will be deposed on took place between Luskin and Novak rather than Rove and Novak, wouldn’t that make Luskin a material witness who would have to step down from his representation of KKKarl?
theoretically, the idea here is to prevent an indictment and trial, and this would be a moot point.
**********
I’m beginning to think the Vanderhei piece was pure bullshit. I think that FitzG may have called Luskin because of all the crap Luskin pulled in the last days of the Grand Jury — Rove has been under suspicion for two years, has changed his story three times, and at the very last minute before Rove is indicted his attorney comes up with “exculpatory evidence” that doesn’t pan out ?!?!
I think this may be FitzG’s way of sending Luskin a message — no more games, or I’ll start supoenaing every person you leaked to for the last two years…. and I’m gonna start with a friend of yours that can’t claim privilege because she quoted you on the record….
Another thing that I’ve been gnawing on is – if the conversation that Novak will be deposed on took place between Luskin and Novak rather than Rove and Novak, wouldn’t that make Luskin a material witness who would have to step down from his representation of KKKarl?
Must. . . have. . . coffee. . .
Rove has not been indicted ~> Luskin has, so far, beaten Fitzgerald.
arbo, if Luskin did manage to keep Rove from being indicted, it was only because Luskin blew a lot of smoke at Fitzgerald in the waning days of the Grand Jury, when FitzG did not have the time to fully investigate whatever Luskin was claiming.
This has to be interpreted as a desperation move on Luskin’s part, and not a successful strategy for exonerating his client.
(and I don’t believe that Luskin was responsible for getting Rove off the hook temporarily. That was Woodward’s doing….)
sonate……..my money is on Susan. Sure hope she stays healthy!
Mrs. K8,
Good mornin’…I’m sorry ta hear that yer fightin’ with what sounds like a rehabilitation project. I’m always the last ta know what goin’ on around my family and since I’m male I ken only keep 1 thing in my head atta time. What are ya battlin…post stroke?
Also, I wanned ta appolgize fer takin’ up so much time on the “courage” and “hero” thing yesterday…I know that stuff gets old in a hurry and until I started postin here I didn’t talk much about it. Sorry, there is nuthin more borin than yesterday’s war.
Re: Woodward
Do ya get the feeling that maybe the whole “slam dunk” quote from George Tenet is just one more lie from the Bush Administration, conveniently peddled via Our Boy Bob?
Maybe that medal of freedom was enough to keep Tenet from ever disputing it.
Rove has not been indicted ~> Luskin has, so far, beaten Fitzgerald.
Please note the wavy line. It means “sort of implies”. If Rove is never indicted, then change it to “->”.
The moment Rove is indicted, he must leave the White House, and the White House becomes rudderless. I have argued that he is exactly the rudder the White House needs right now, because his skill set will push them further into oblivion.
Fitzgerald would not see it that way. To paraphrase ‘Me’, Fitzgerald puts criminals in prison. Period. Rove will not see freedom for a second longer than Fitzgerald absolutely must give him.
I know what I am hoping for. But I was kind of hoping the Patriots would beat Kansas City this weekend, and it didn’t happen.
If the RawStory article about Ralston’s testimony is correct, Fitz has Rove on obstruction — cold! (And maybe suborning perjury too.) In that case, the conversation with V. Novak might relate to what counts Fitz indicts Rove on, but not whether Fitz indicts Rove. Rove is a dead man walking, IF the RawStory report is correct.
i’m not the only one with bad html this morning
bob adams link above yielded:
ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved
——————————————————————————–
While trying to retrieve the URL: http://localhost:10141/blogger…..00/FDL.jpg
The following error was encountered:
Access Denied.
Access control configuration prevents your request from being allowed at this time. Please contact your service provider if you feel this is incorrect.
Your cache administrator is webmaster.
——————————————————————————–
Generated Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:24:44 GMT by photos2.blogger.com (squid)
Maybe because I haven’t had my morning coffee and am still quite obtunded by sleep but after casting my eyes on this story for the first time this morning it’s making me feel as if the whole Rove indictment thang is wishful thinking.
Believe me – I want Rove to go down HARD. But Luskin is a very savvy attorney (ex-DOJ) and he is pulling out every trick in the book. Maybe it’s not quite so simple but it seems from a cursory reading of this story that Luskin was the one presenting Novak to exonerate his client and they would have no reason to spin it as such unless they really believed that it would work.
True, I’m not quite sure how the Novak angle fits in with the Ralston angle. Maybe Novak goes toward the “outting” charge somehow whereas Ralston is going toward the lieing/obstruction charge. Apples and oranges and what Luskin is trying to do is to limit damage. I just would not be so quick to dismiss Luskin’s abilities and Rove’s greased pig attributes.
Luskin makes you understand why those lawyer jokes are so friggin funny.
HeÂ’s just a sleaze ball in a trench coat. Ever time I read about this guy heÂ’s exposing this and flashing that. IÂ’m busy trying to figure out if this jerk could be related to Pee Wee Herman. This whole affair should be rated XXX for being so sickening. Fitz probably has to wash his hands every five minutes with antibacterial soap just to stay clean.
I wish Luskin would disappear and go back to playing with himself in his dark musky movie theater keeping all the sordid details to himself.
oops
typos in html tags have less good unintended results
interesting comment from siun (10:02)
Sure the outcome may not change but they haven’t lost anything and they might save Rove or W or create the right atmosphere for pardons>/b>
this above all makes sense
if you know you/your client is going down, the next step would seem to be mitigation
hard as it may be to beleive, the fellow across the aisle from me at work (my personal barometer of the wingnut persuasion) has moved to the equivilency spin
“So BushCo lied – Clintone lied too.
He even got impeached. Which is worse”
While this is patently stupid, you can see that there might be some wiggle room for pardons in this ‘reasoning’.
i continue to leave the bulk of my optimism squarely on Fitz to make the case that even my neighbor cannot refute.
I pray that he pulls the chesnuts out of the fire.
Poor Kobe, getting shortchanged like that. You owe that dog an extra long walk this morning, Jane.
Loved the Arianna quote…and isn’t it interesting how the trend has changed from journalists reporting the news to journalists BEING the news?
Oh, and check out my new desktop on my notebook: desktop image
Norske –
Sorry, dear heart, that I wasn’t here at 1:14am when you asked for me. I’m having a bad night, pain-wise, and have been up and down in attempts to get some sleep.
Just did a bit of reading at dKos and Atrios, and popped back to take one last peek at this thread, but now think I’m exhausted enough to finally fall asleep.
Whenever I make it back here tomorrow, I’ll keep my eyes peeled for you. You know I always enjoy your comments, you’ve got both a good mind and a good heart which always shines through.
Along with our hosts, there are so many wonderful contributors here; this place is a blessing, even (or maybe especially!) on difficult nights.
OT — Oh, rwcole is going to be PISSED that his very own congressman plead guilty and resigned while he’s on vacation!
And, I am getting damn good at reading guilty plea agreements. One more and I think I can start writing them. Just kidding!
me pretty much sums it up for me. fitz told us he had most of the case complete 10/28. i imagine he could of indicted rove at that time if he’d wanted to and probably kept him around, dangling on a string cuz the song and dance at the lead up to the indictments provided fitz w/enough juice he thought he’d be more useful on the outside. the only big change in the story since then has been woody,x and ralston(that we know of). did rove/luskin lead to woody? did fitz find something in woody , x’s, or ralston’s testimony that would lead him to want to review something vnov covered in her articles?
i still think it’s a mistake to assume luskin led fitz to vnov. knowing what a whor for press luskin is, i wouldn’t put him past him to claim vnov as his prize. in know way do i think he’s any match for fitz,and he’s probably in the dark about 99% of what fitz knows.. whoever the sources are for the wapo piece seem clearly in rovecamp. it’s all smoke and mirrors. rove has unlimited bunnies to pull out of his hat, why stop the flow. fitz is smart.
Mrs. K8,
Are ya out there?
arbogast,
Me too, I wanna know why ya think he’s a match fer Fitz. I guess I ken appreciate his massive amount a hard work with an impossible client. But I think Rove got ‘im up to ‘is neck in the obstruction in the very beginnin and he’s scamblin fer his life here. Faster and faster it spins, wider and wider are the “gyers”
Oh Jane,
That post about the question of Luskin’s savin his own butt (12:06am) waz me
I would say that Luskin has been incredibly effective in protecting his client. He appears to be a match for Fitzgerald.
arbogast, help me understand why you say this. I’m not saying you will prove to be wrong, it’s just that I don’t see the evidence for that.
If you mean that Luskin’s been “effective” because Rove has yet to be indicted, then in that sense I agree.
But we don’t know exactly what kind of strategy Fitzgerald has, and we certainly don’t know what other evidence he has that none of us knows about.
I agree with others who claim that Luskin’s spinning enables Rove to keep his job (and some viability for having continued “power”) — for the time being.
Please help me see what you think makes Luskin a “match” for Fitzgerald.
“partisan gunslinger”
Why assume that was the truth? Why not assume it was what Rove told Novak to say to conceal himself as the source…knowing that being the source would expose him (Rove) to a prison sentence?
Why assume that Novak, in his column, does not consciously lie? When all is said and done, that would be a remarkable assumption.
Jane,
First of all thanx again fer Firedog and you women who ken multi-task and keep more’n 2 contradictory ideas/facts in yer heads at the same time. I’m at work on Med/Surg tanight so I am thankful for yer latenight “wrap-up”.
Jest one question on this Luskin to V. Novak flea-flicker. Is it possible we’re makin’ WAYYY too much outta this and Luskin is jest tryin’ ta cover his own gluteous for havin a conversation with Viv that Fitz was gunna find out about anyways? I mean, Luskin’s neck is way out on the line a Fitz’s ax for crossin over from spin ta obstruction and he (Luskin) needs ta patch up any holes that Fitz might discover on his own. Forgive me for the naive question but my head hurts most a the time and I need ta simplify this stuff ta be able ta tell the players without a calculus text.
Can anyone overturn this comment by ‘Me’:
In the end, the only reason he started presenting evidence to the new GJ is because he made up his mind he has solid evidence of a felony and he is going to see it gets charged and tried in court.
In this context I would argue that the Viveca Novak thing is in fact an effort to once again get Rove off the hook.
I would say that Luskin has been incredibly effective in protecting his client. He appears to be a match for Fitzgerald.
Don’t people at Rove’s income level all have cell phones? What happens if Cooper calls Rove’s cell phone instead of going through the switchboard? The logging system seems very easy to bypass.
kettle corn – for that extra special holiday entertainment treat
http://appetizer.allrecipes.com/az/KttlCrn.asp
1/2 cup unpopped popcorn kernels
1/4 cup white sugar
1/4 cup vegetable oil
Place the popcorn and sugar in a large pot with vegetable oil. Over a medium heat, begin to pop the popcorn. Constantly shake the pot to ensure that the popcorn kernels and oil do not burn. Once the popping has slowed, remove the pot from heat.
I’ll take Pick Your Poison for $1000 Pat.
Scooter Walks the Line
Viva Viveca
Susan Belladonna
What is Who Moved My Soap?
From the RAW STORY piece cited above:
The November 9 blurb by Philippine New reporting Ralston’s scheduled reappearance before Fitzgerald:
jwp — great link, thanks much.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..01225.html
Richard Cohen… He’s been on my “hit list” for some weeks now and he is actually reading his mail and taking BushCo to task.
Nice to see, and he is being consistant.
http://fusioner.proboards60.co…..1131129004
Over 500 hits today ;)
Dondi — I did not give the “friends” thing too much consideration, all these people are “friends,” hell a lot of them are my friends. Viveca Novak is a reporter with a strong, long-standing reputation in DC, I really don’t think she’s going to go in and lie to save Luskin’s client. Some might, she wouldn’t be one I would peg for it.
the “dragged” into the case comment is amazing. It’s going to be a long time before I trust what VanderHei says again.
My bet is that Rove gets indicted first week of January. It’s too close to Christmas right now. Fitz will wait.
Radish, nice post
I have a link that is interesting. Helps to gauge what (if anything) the local papers cover about Plamegate.
http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/
might be somewhat relevant to the “is the spin effective” discussion
Yes, Pach and Jane, the “star system” in the media is a two-edged sword. It’s counted as a useful weapon in the competitive struggle for market share (print, radio, or TV – all the same as corporate media). But it can also turn around and bite hard when a “star” like Woodward gets to be bigger than the house that built him.
Nowadays, print, radio and TV all feed on each other with guest appearances by the “stars” – and, in the latest twist, to keep up with the power of the internet, the stars have their own blogs.
ItÂ’s fascinating to watch this interplay as the competition intensifies and the technology moves ahead. But, in the process, real news analysis and investigative journalism become harder and harder to find.
Btw, the WaPo has been steadily losing market share in the DC area and is desperately trying its hand at every possible weapon to retain a foothold.
Jane – did you notice this paragraph?
“It could not be learned what Luskin and Novak, WHO ARE FRIENDS, discussed that could help prove Rove did nothing illegal in the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity to reporters and the subsequent investigation of it.”
I wonder if the fact that Luskin and Novak are buddies is the reason that there’s speculation that this is going to clear Rove, not cause him trouble.
ALSO: “Time has not objected to Fitzgerald’s questioning Novak. The magazine waged a lengthy legal battle to keep Fitzgerald’s grand jury from questioning Cooper before acquiescing earlier this year. Unlike Cooper, Viveca Novak is not seeking to protect a confidential source and was not subpoenaed to testify.”
I am going to jump in with a couple of cents here. I have been holding back, reading, and digesting this for some time.
What we are seeing is an attempt to throw sand in the umpires eyes without the perps getting caught with dirt on their hands. I don’t think it will work. I think they are stupid for trying, but then, we know they are stupid.
So what it boils down to is a delaying action. And attempt to slow the inevitable (worse case) or blind the umpire without getting caught (best case).
Fitz never would have gone to a second GJ unless he had evidence and could charge someone for a felony. He does not fish with a GJ unless he already has something on the line and he is working a play. All eyes are on Rove as the fish being played here.
Remember the mysterious email that Luskin produced months after Rove had made his first GJ appearance. Rove had to reappear, and then come back, and then come back yet a forth time… For the plain and simple fact he did not follow instructions during his first appearance under oath “Tell the truth, the whole truth” – No, he played a game called dodge and hide the ball.
This is a new game with VNovak, call it “spin the umpire”, and while they are playing, they are kicking up dust and trying to prevent Fitz from dropping the anvil on Rove.
Fitz is extremely patient. He will gladly play spin with them. Because they are stupid, he realizes that the more they spin, the more they talk out of class, the more witnesses they insist he depose… The more evidence he will ferret out on the case.
Fitz will look under every rock, he will dig into every crack… Honestly, he loves this stuff, it’s all he lives for.
In the end, the only reason he started presenting evidence to the new GJ is because he made up his mind he has solid evidence of a felony and he is going to see it gets charged and tried in court.
Plus he knows Rove is scum, and all the spin in the world is not going to wash the perp off that pig.
That’s my 2 cents
:)
Monk — that is too funny! I am the one who wears the leash, though. Kobe calls all the shots.
I gotta throw in my $.02 with Pachacutec here, and IIRC emptywheel said something along these lines recently too — this is spin, and it’s all about Rove staying effective as long as possible.
Look at this from Rove’s POV. Once Rover is indicted he is out, and once he is out he will be meeting people he stepped on on the way up. Keeping Fitz at bay is necessary (see Swopa’s hysterical Luskin/Fitz conversation last thread) but it isn’t enough. People like Andrea Mitchell and Tim Russert (and most importantly dubya of course!) have to be prevented from writing Rove off as well… Those people are, frankly, far more important than the rest of us. So he abso-frickin-lutely has to do two things without fail: a) postpone any indictment until the last possible moment, and b) retain an air of infallibility in the meantime.
The reasons for (a) are pretty obvious I think. Reasons for (b) are that DC is a town full of self-serving sheep, and the minute that the conventional wisdom becomes that his departure is a done deal people will turn on him like the leaves of aspens in the fall (they’re connected at the roots as ya know).
This is also (I think) the core reason for Luskin’s intermittent and otherwise perplexing “chatty cathy” routine. Bushco are used to steering the narrative via lazy reporters. Until recently Rove had a fine tuned machine devoted to it. But it would be a little, uh, awkward for him to deliver leaks through the WH press/comm staff right now, no? Perhaps even legally risky. And as for talking to people himself, well, that looks a bit needy, even by DC media whore standards. Besides, he’s busy rebuilding New Orleans. At the same he’s gotta get the story out, and leaking through Luskin even has a layer of A/C privilege. So what if a few things get lost in translation?
Okay… Jane owes me $2 for the jumbo butterfly prawn that I spat out upon reading the “bullied the dogs into a hasty poop” line.
Golden.
However, it did inspire the newest firedoglake design:
http://home.comcast.net/~itfes…..y_poop.jpg
-Monk
I saw one on the Duke Cunningham story, I’m going to continue to take it personally until proven wrong. It’ll save my whole evening.
Could be a trackback error. Looks like they’re all down?
I feel so unloved. The Technorati link is off the VandeHei piece.
Was it something I said?
Spin – worked as a spinner (well, we thought of it as helping reporters cover the news of course)
For the really pro spinners, one goal would be to create enough public distrust or confusion about the investigation that the public throws up it’s hands and moves along to the next big story (and I think we should watch for this type of spin – not direct attacks on Fitz but so much information and detail and legalism being leaked and covered and spouted in the MSM that people just plain get tired of it. Sure the outcome may not change but they haven’t lost anything and they might save Rove or W or create the right atmosphere for pardons.
In case anyone missed it, Jeralyn has a nice wrap up linking to the many reporter bashing jobs we in the blogosphere have done today.
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/013252.html
it’s damn hard when your biggest story to date is about how your own reporter bs’d everyone in your newsroom for two years and then did interviews with everyone but you.
Ah, Jane, honey, that sentence gave me a nice belly laugh. Um, through my washboard abs. Ahem.
I guess I’m off to bed.
I will leave it at this for the evening:
If Luskin falls in the forest and no one is there, does he make a sound? Yes.
Now I know the answer to that question. I can go to bed.
Apologies to all trees in advance.
the green lantern — It is a horrible system created by competition, no doubt about it. They have to puff up small bits of information into something big in order to keep pace with the NYT, and it’s damn hard when your biggest story to date is about how your own reporter bs’d everyone in your newsroom for two years and then did interviews with everyone but you.
Folks, we just don’t know what Viveca’s testimony is about or why she’s been called. I don’t trust Jimmy V’s sources. They have their agenda.
Green Lantern: I agree with your analysis regarding the WaPo’s investment in promoting Vandehei as a property, because someone in marketing has obviously decided that grooming in-house personalities and pundits is good for circulation and advertising sales.
However, tonight’s Vandehei mess is a nice example of how the star system gone haywire is an absolutely useless approach to reporting the news. What fucking news? How they arrived at Jimmy V as their wonderkid is beyond me.
It would be interesting to study any apparent “star system” at the Post, to see how much this is a corporate strategy to market the paper through its personalities.
It would explain a lot about why they created new rules for Woodward, allowing him to develop a symbiotic relationship with his publishing business while doing little actual reporting of any substance. Both sides benefitted from the association, from a business and branding point of view.
But reporting? He did fuckall, really. Woodward is the most egregious example of the star system gone haywire, but if they are trying to prop up boys like Jimmy V as their next generation, then it would appear they have not learned at all the lessons they should be learning from the Woodward mess. But then we knew that already.
Oh, and I’m sure the WaPo is not alone in this strategy. We’re used to seeing it in television “news,” but I guess I was not as tuned into its presence in the print media.
Sigh.
GSD – I’ve checked out most of those, and I agree. I keep coming back here. I do find it a bit hard to keep up, however. Most folks type faster than I read.
green lantern — I agree that the story is spin, but it’s news also. We spent hours trying to figure out what Vvak would be giving Fitz that will nail Rove. We’re not doing that any more. In other words, there is SOMETHING to the story, slanted and fluffed as it is.
Siun,
I think that Luskin offered Viv up to Fitz.
-GSD
Gramps,
Rawstory is pretty good. Sometimes the headlines are a bit sensationalist, but pretty good.
Beats the piss out of Drudge-wudgie.
Also, Buzzflash.com is a good source. Crooksandliars.com has some great newsclips and also Thinkprogress.org too. Mediamatters.org too.
They all pale in comparison to the great work here at FDL, best message board around…..
-GSD
The story is spin, as you say, Jane. But that doesnÂ’t explain why the WaPo would buy into it and give it the page 01 treatment.
As I suggested in the previous thread, they (WaPo) obviously sense that something is coming down the pike – a possible indictment against Rove – because of the report about FitzÂ’s calling a second grand jury. They have to keep these tid-bits up front in order to appear to be ahead of the story and beat the competition.
Well, it would be dynamite if true.
EPU: fair enough, but the general public is not the primary target of this spin campaign. The DC professional class is the primary target, as well as the Republican base and operatives. If they believe Karl can survive, then he has a chance. If Karl builds up enough momentum, then the public will come along and the bad news will be old news, for those who ever headr it in the first place.
As I said, it’s a rearguard action, but they fight as best they can, and hope for better field position tomorrow.
OT: just watched my old DVD of the movie The Insider. Something about the Vandehei thing tonight, maybe, required it of me.
Very nice deconstruction of the non-story story, jane.
Does Raw Story sometimes get it right?
Yeah they get it right sometimes. They have real investigative reporters, and they try very hard to confirm thru two sources before publishing a scoop.
posted at the end of last – still curious:
a question gang – was V Novak subpoened or did she volunteer to testify – and isn’t it true that she is not testifying before the Grand Jury but merely answering questions at Fitx office?
Before all the worry about sexism earlier today, I had wanted to propose my pet theory – that Ms. Novak, like so many of us ladies and gents here, just wants a date with Fitz!
Speaking of Ralston, I’m very new to these blogs. Does Raw Story sometimes get it right?
Can’t wait for them to spin the Susan Ralston revelations. That ought to be a side-splitter.
Speaking of 2008, Colonel Mustard, there’s another story in the Post about Americans’ low regard for congress lately, what with all the scandals and investigations. Seven Republicans and one Democrat are implicated, yet both Repubs and Dems are tarred with the same brush. Here’re some snippets:
“Republicans, who control the White House and Congress, are most vulnerable to this wave. But pollsters say that voters think less of both political parties the more prominent the issue of corruption in Washington becomes, and that incumbents generally could feel the heat of citizen outrage if the two latest guilty pleas multiply in coming months.
No fewer than seven lawmakers, including a Democrat, have been indicted, have pleaded guilty or are under investigation for improper conduct such as conspiracy, securities fraud and improper campaign donations. Congress’s approval ratings have fallen off the table, in some measure because of headlines about these scandals.
“The indictments and the investigations have strengthened the feeling that people have that in fact there’s too much money in Washington and that the money is being used to influence official decisions,” said William McInturff, a Republican pollster with Public Opinion Strategies. “Polls show that neither party is held in high regard.”
snip
Here’s the end:
“In addition, for the first time in its 15-year history, the Wall Street Journal-NBC poll this year showed that the public’s negative feelings exceeded their positive feelings about both political parties at the same time. ‘These are cautionary notes that are affecting both parties’ political standing,’ McInturff said.”
So the few Dems who may face charges should go, I agree, but this story, which is mostly about Republicans, tries to say, through spokespeople for the majority party, that, Hey, it’s all of ‘em.
I lost trust in VandeHei after Olbermann interviewed him regarding the Woodward “bombshell”. The guy refused to get the concept of “first known”, no matter the extensive set-up Keith had provided, and despite Keith’s persistent attemps to establsih this fact in conversation with VandeHei that night, his nex WaPo article continued to muddy that water. IMHO, he’s either not too bright, unforgivably careless, or something worse….
Jane:
Right. I agree with your analysis. As I mentioned in the last thread, however, the article at least ends our speculation that Vvak is giving Fitz some great new ammo.
Grampa — hence the term “goat rope.”
Pachacutec – From last thread but on topic. I understand the theory of the spin, I just don’t believe in its efficacy (at all) on the general public. Its as if Luskin is putting out a story that Rover is a little bit pregnant. The audience of one theory (Preznit, he is a fantasist afterall) might work, but why would Rover need to use the Washington Post to tell Preznit he is really innocent after all?
I think Luskin’s idea of “exculpatory” evidence is a conversation that is not incriminating. So he had this conversation with Vvak and said NOTHING that would undercut Rove’s excuse for lying. He’s asking Fitz to check it out, and Fitz is simply being accommodating.
Missed the last thread.
Couldn’t get the kids in bed.
Wanted to caption the talking heads:
Andrea interviews Woodward’s source.
Condi never denied; her spokesman Jim Wilkerson lied (again):
“Secretary Rice wasn’t Woodward’s source,” Rice senior adviser Jim Wilkinson said.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind….._Wilkinson
And now I’m getting fried because I’m a practicing Plameaholic.
Good thing you got him that fireplace
Don’t forget the smoking jacket.
Could all this just be more silly Luskin blusterspin, but to Fitz is dotting the last I and crossing the last T?
What if Fitz is simply bending over backwards to give Rove every opportunity to avoid charges?
Per the DOJ Grand Juror Manual Guidelines, G3:
” If a subject or target wants to have the testimony of a third party presented to the grand jury and the potential testimony is arguably relevant to the grand jury’s inquiry, the prosecutor should attempt to obtain a proffer of the testimony. When passing on such requests, it must be kept in mind that the grand jury was never intended to be and is not properly either a first-stage adversary proceeding, or the arbiter of guilt or innocence”
link: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/publi…..6.htm#IVG3
If the conversations between Luskin and VNovak were truly exculpatory, I hardly think Luskin’s role as lawyer/source and Luskin’s role as reporter could be rendered incidental, as appears to be the case here.
Is it 2008 Yet?
Rove a l’orange! O la la.
No Church Bingo For Kobe Tonight
Man, between that and being aced out on the site logo, the poodle’s had a rough day.
Good thing you got him that fireplace.
FITZ!!!!!!