home

Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record

By Jeralyn, Section Valerie Plame Leak Case
Posted on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 11:28:22 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Jason Leopold reports Fitzgerald met with the PlameGate grand jury yesterday and told them he is preparing mulitple charges against Karl Rove.

Jason also interviewed Rove lawyer Robert Luskin yesterday.

"Mr. Rove is still a subject of the investigation," Luskin said. In a previous interview, Luskin asserted that Rove would not be indicted by Fitzgerald, but he was unwilling to make that prediction again Wednesday.

"Mr. Fitzgerald hasn't made any decision on the charges and I can't speculate what the outcome will be," Luskin said. "Mr. Rove has cooperated completely with the investigation."

Does Luskin's refusal to continue to maintain Rove won't be indicted mean he isn't sure or that he's resigned to an Indictment? I don't know, but Jason seems certain an Indictment is looming.

< Duke Lacrosse: New Search Warrants, Cabdriver Talks | Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record | 12 comments (12 topical)
    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:04:29 PM EST
    Yesterday, when I heard that Rove's White House responsibility as policy adviser had been eliminated, I suspected that it has something to do with an near-future indictment. A clue! Though only time will confirm this thought, it makes sense. With an indictment, Rove cannot do the country's business, but he can work under the radar for the GOP. Keep it coming, Leopold!

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#2)
    by squeaky on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:13:36 PM EST
    I don't know, but Jason seems certain an Indictment is looming.
    I understand that as a moderator it is good to be neutralish, but Jeralyn, you have got to be kidding. My Ouiji board floated out of the closet all by itself on this one.

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#3)
    by scribe on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:17:28 PM EST
    Ok, so the first key part* of Leopold's article is that Luskin says (a) Rover has been cooperating with Fitz and (b) Rover has been cooperating voluntarily with Fitz and (c) Rover has no deal in place with Fitz. Somehow, that does not wash. It seems hair-raisingly dangerous to allow your client to cooperate w/o any agreement with the prosecutor while he is that pros' potential target (regardless of whether you've gotten a target letter) and when that pros is known for nailing liars, and your client makes his living, uh, spinning the truth. If Luskin's such a great attorney, he either (a) is/was fibbing to Leopold, (b) his greatness is exaggerated, or (c) Fitz really threatened to nail Rover during the Come-to-Jesus-moment last fall and has been playing Rover into the net ever since. The second key part is that Rover lied or misstated 8 out of 9 times. That's a lot, even for a pol. That leaves Rover with an exposure of, uh, decades. The interesting part is, even if/because Fitz charges Rover solely on false statements and obstruction, he keeps the case against Rover separate and unentangled from the case against Scooter. The defense of one is not entangled with the defense of the other, and the prosecutions are also unentangled. Fitz then gets to sit back and watch those two defendants race each other to sell out the other - or others higher up. Good, elegant lawyering. * I had assumed Fitz would really start to push on this and Scooter after the Ryan corruption case wrapped up. So Fitz going back to the grand jury now does not IMHO signify anything more than he has time to do it now.

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#4)
    by Punchy on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:31:41 PM EST
    Come on, everyone. Yesterday was the signal. Rove is far too arrogant to be self-demoting. He changed positions so that the indictment looks less attached to Bush.

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#5)
    by squeaky on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 12:34:41 PM EST
    It's a fine line between 'fully cooperating' and being a snitch with a deal. Perhaps Rove may not have taken the deal and is still working it. Also if the 'deal' is confidential isn't the fact that a deal was made also confidential? I guess, if that is the case Luskin still fibbed. If he said that he was not at liberty to answer the question he would be answering the question. What to do if you want to protect your clients reputation, except lie. Funny idea, protecting Rove's reputation, isn't it?

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#6)
    by scribe on Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 01:07:09 PM EST
    Squeaky: Rover's spent a lifetime of hard work building a body of work and reputation for being the pol he is. I'm sure he would only want accuracy in reciting all he's done.... That his work is something the vast majority of people would likely find repugnant at the least is no reason to misrepresent it.... (tongue firmly in cheek)

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 05:24:50 AM EST
    Squeaky:
    Funny idea, protecting Rove's reputation, isn't it?
    Isn't that the only way it can be done? As a dark comedy? ----- Karl Rove explained his secret for winning elections:
    "We employed a simple formula that has been used by many of the most successful campaigns run in the last 200 years...
    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 12:27:12 PM EST
    I guess we will hear something very soon:
    According to ABC News' The Note, Patrick Fitzgerald has already convened the latest Plame grand jury this morning, at 9:30 AM. Atrios and ThinkProgress noted that last night on Keith Olbermann's "Countdown", MSNBC's David Shuster reported that there are signs that Fitzgerald has now focused on an indictment of Karl Rove, confirming a story that Jason Leopold had at Truthout.org yesterday.
    the Left Coaster via atrios

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 02:33:17 PM EST
    It is pretty clear that GWB's shuffling of White House insiders is in typical Bush Administration "preemptive" mode. Following the precedent of Scooter Libby; it was first Libby, then Card, then McClellan, then Rove. Next is the resignation of VP Cheney (for reasons of "health")? (and as some already predicted months ago). There are two precedents for the resignation of American vice presidents: John C. Calhoun; and Spiro T. Agnew. But, then, keep in mind President Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon after the latter resigned. (Ford was the only vice president in American history to take office after the resignation of a president; but it is a president. The next precedent would be whoever takes office after the resignations of both a president and a vice president. . . .) In Plamegate, should the writing on the wall appear to be true, who will resign and who will be pardoned? If the president and the vice president both resign or are forced to resign (say, prior to impeachment hearings and conviction in the Senate), then what happens? And how could all of this be resolved prior to November 2006 and/or even November 2008? Possible scenarios?

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#10)
    by squeaky on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 02:48:53 PM EST
    Susan-
    Next is the resignation of VP Cheney (for reasons of "health")? (and as some already predicted months ago).
    The only way Cheney will leave office is in handcuffs or on a stretcher. If the pres and veep resign is will only be because the Dems win a majority in Congress. Perhaps we will see a historic moment where the Democrats can appoint a Dem prez and veep to replace Republicans. What a nice thought that is to ponder.

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 02:53:06 PM EST
    sorry for typographical error: I meant "Fitzgerald" not "Fitzwater" above. Watergate/Whitewater. . . . it's enough to have "water" on the brain. . . .

    Re: Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 02:59:09 PM EST
    The only way Cheney will leave office is in handcuffs or on a stretcher.
    Both are within the realm of possibility as things stand. I would think that Cheney himself would prefer resignation to either of the other choices [were they real, which I would doubt!]. There are "get out of prison" cards people can play and phoney health crises one can reverse. . . . I may be watching too many thrillers; though life itself seems to be imitating art these days.) There's always the "I would like to spend more time with my family" reason for resignation, which maybe he would. . . . what he can see in being vice president these days is hard to fathom; he could always say that he wants to spend more time relaxing in retirement--fishing and hunting (if not shooting any more of his buddies in the face--and feet, so to speak).

    Rove Lawyer Luskin Goes On the Record | 12 comments (12 topical)