Luskin Denies Latest Truthout Report on Rove Secret Indictment
Posted on Tue Jun 20, 2006 at 05:11:29 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Bump and Update: Rove attorney Robert Luskin sent me this denial of Truthout's report:
"It is insane and nonsensical, equal parts bizarre innuendo and alleged facts that do not square with reality or the American legal system. Truthout's stubborn nuttiness to the contrary, some times things are simply as they appear: Mr. Fitzgerald completed his investigation, reviewed the evidence, and concluded that it simply does not support a charge. There never was -- not for a second -- any secret meetings at my office, plea negotiations, secret sealed (or not so sealed, as the case may be) indictments, or last minute concessions."
*******
Original Post
New from Truthout: Still Insists Rove Was Indicted
New today from Truthout: They are standing by the key details of Jason Leopold's May 13 article reporting Karl Rove was indicted. It's a long explanation, but here's the key detail from a legal point of view:
Yes, it does appear that Truthout was used, but not lied to or misled. The facts appear to have been accurate. We reported them, and in so doing, apparently became an instrument. From all indications, our reports, first on May 13 that Rove had been indicted, and then on June 12 when we published case number "06 cr 128," forced Rove and Luskin back to the table with Fitzgerald, not once but twice. They apparently sought to avoid public disclosure and were prepared to do what they had to do to avoid it.
The electronic communication from Fitzgerald to Luskin, coming immediately on the heels of our Monday morning, June 12 article "Sealed vs. Sealed" that became the basis for the mainstream media's de facto exoneration of Karl Rove was, our sources told us, negotiated quickly over the phone later that afternoon. Luskin contacted Fitzgerald, reportedly providing concessions that Fitzgerald considered to be of high value, and Fitzgerald reportedly reciprocated with the political cover Rove wanted in the form of a letter that was faxed to Luskin's office.
In the very next paragraph Truthout writes:
Our sources provided us with additional detail, saying that Fitzgerald is apparently examining closely Dick Cheney's role in the Valerie Plame matter, and apparently sought information and evidence from Karl Rove that would provide documentation of Cheney's involvement. Rove apparently was reluctant to cooperate and Fitzgerald, it appears, was pressuring him to do so, our sources told us.
What does that mean? Are Truthout's sources saying the alleged last minute high-value concessions Luskin provided to Fitzgerald included cooperation against Cheney?
I'll be back with some analysis of this after I contemplate it some more. I've also asked Mark Corallo or Robert Luskin to respond, so check back.
In the meantime, I'd note that in a comment at America Blog, Jason responds to Sunday Times reporter Joe Lauria's WaPo commentary. Truthout says it will respond to Lauria's article on Wednesday at 5 pm PT. Since I'm mentioned in Lauria's article, I provide some background here.
| < Nifong Responds to Newsweek in Duke Lacrosse Case | Safavian Found Guilty > |
