home

O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer

Over at the Huffington Post, Lawrence O'Donnell has some sharp words for Robert Luskin, Karl Rove's lawyer, in response to Luskin's denial yesterday. Today, O'Donnell says (snip):

Luskin claimed that the prosecutor “asked us not to talk about what Karl has had to say.” This is highly unlikely. Prosecutors have absolutely no control over what witnesses say when they leave the grand jury room. Rove can tell us word-for-word what he said to the grand jury and would if he thought it would help him. And notice that Luskin just did reveal part of Rove’s grand jury testimony, the fact that he had a conversation with Cooper. Rove would not let me get one day of traction on this story if he could stop me. If what I have reported is not true, if Karl Rove is not Matt Cooper’s source, Rove could prove that instantly by telling us what he told the grand jury. Nothing prevents him from doing that, except a good lawyer who is trying to keep him out of jail.

< Iraqi Torture Camps | Leader of Saudi al-Qaeda Killed in Clash >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    The only reason Fitzgerald would make such a request is that disclosures might hamper the ongoing investigation. And the notion that Rove wouldn't want to hamper that investigation doesn't pass the laugh test.

    Re: O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer (none / 0) (#2)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    et al - I think the operative word is, "asked." If the lawyer wanted to comply, why should O'Donnell complain?

    Re: O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    Jim, You miss the point. The point is Rove is the source who outed Plame, and O'Donnell was merely commenting on the logic behind reading into what Rove's paid mouthpiece is spouting. Now, I'll say it again, this is an action you would never even allow the PERCEPTION of tolerating had it been committed by a dem president's string-puller. Rove should be destroyed publicly, privately, every way a coddled person of privelege can be. Whether he will or not is another story.

    Re: O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    Indict him, prosecute him. But no military tribunals, no stress positions, just due process of the law. I suspect Fitzpatrick is a competent prosecutor and that may mean Rove is in deep trouble. A few years in prison will be good for him.

    Re: O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer (none / 0) (#5)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:50 PM EST
    Competent i.e. not completely in the tank?