truthout: He Was Indicted, I Tell You!
Bizarrely, Marc Ash of truthout has decided to stick by the Karl Rove indictment story despites overwhelming (read: absolute) evidence to the contrary – and ups the ante by strongly suggesting Rove has implicated Cheney:
Our primary sources for this report are career federal law enforcement and federal government officials speaking on condition of anonymity. This report was developed under the supervision of all of Truthout’s senior editors, which should be taken as an indication that we view this matter with the utmost seriousness.
…On Tuesday, June 13, when the mainstream media broke their stories that Karl Rove had been exonerated, there were frank discussions amongst our senior editors about retracting our stories outright. The problem we wrestled with was what exactly do we retract? Should we say that Rove had not in fact been indicted? Should we say that our sources provided us with false or misleading information? Had Truthout been used? Without a public statement from Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald we felt that it was premature to retract our report.
After spending the past month retracing our steps and confirming facts, we’ve come full circle. Our sources continue to maintain that a grand jury has in fact returned an indictment. Our sources said that parts of the indictment were read to Karl Rove and his attorney on Friday, May 12, 2006. Last week, we pointed to a sealed federal indictment, case number “06 cr 128,” which is still sealed and we are still pointing to it. During lengthy conversations with our sources over the past month, they reiterated that the substance of our report on May 13, 2006, was correct, and immediately following our report, Karl Rove’s status in the CIA leak probe changed. In summary, as we press our investigation we find indicators that more of our key facts are correct, not less.
That leaves the most important question: If our sources maintain that a grand jury has returned an indictment – and we have pointed to a criminal case number that we are told corresponds to it – then how is it possible that Patrick Fitzgerald is reported to have said that ‘he does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove at this time?’ That is a very troubling question, and the truth is, we do not yet have a definitive answer. We also continue to be very troubled that no one has seen the reported communication from Fitzgerald to Rove’s attorney Robert Luskin, and more importantly, how so much public judgment could be based on a communication that Luskin will not put on the table. Before we can assess the glaring contradiction between what our sources say and what Luskin says Fitzgerald faxed to him, we need to be able to consider what was faxed – and in its entirety.
What appears to have happened is that – and this is where Truthout blundered – in our haste to report the indictment we never considered the possibility that Patrick Fitzgerald would not make an announcement. We simply assumed – and we should not have done so – that he would tell the press. He did not. Fitzgerald appears to have used the indictment, and more importantly, the fear that it would go public, to extract information about the Plame outing case from Rove.
>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.
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.
In other words – we weren’t wrong! We’re heroes! Don’t you see, you fools? It was us – we forced Rove’s hand! We control space and time! Bwwwaaaaahaaaaaaahaaaaaa! And you thought we would apologize! And how do we know? By relying on our original mistaken sources and a sealed case with contents we have no earthly way of knowing about! BWAAAAHAAAAAHAAAA!
Suckers…
Man, this just keeps getting weirder. Every time the facts seem to contradict their reporting, they just double-down. It’s really creeping me out at this point.
Actually, this whole episode reminds me a little of the Bush administration’s response to the warrantless surveillance program. Despite the fact that the program is pretty blatantly illegal, the Bush administration keeps telling judges that it is in fact legal. Unfortunately, explaining why it is legal would so damage national security that the only option the judge has is to dismiss the case. Call it the Leopold defense.
Well, dang it, I keep meaning to review the Greenwald book, where I intend to talk about some of those things, but time has been conspiring against me – I’m about 60% through. Soon, soon…
[...] Mark Coffey on the purple unicorn sighting. [...]
BREAKING: IT TURNS OUT ROVE WAS INDEED INDICTED - IT'S JUST THAT FITZGERALD WON'T TELL ANYONE, WHICH ALLOWS THAT LYING LUSKIN LIAR TO RUN AROUND TELLING LIES. BUT TRUST US, DICK CHENEY IS, LIKE, SO TOTALLY SCREWED, MAN. SERIOUSLY. …
*must credit protein wisdom* Not to get too far out in front of the news cycle here, but it appears TruthOut has been fully exonerated with respect to its earlier Rove reportage, and that Marc Ash, Jason Leopold, and their unnamed sources in federal la…
Comrades,
So, do you think it’s possible that TruthOut is being produced by the same team that writes for Pravda? Pravda is running an article about how Washington DC is under attack by US Special Forces as part of a coup to establish a dictatorship…. hell, it’s almost a weird as the sh*t published in the Star or Enquirer…..
Probably all graduates of the Columbia School of Journalism.
Respects,
Gwedd
“ENDEAVORING TO PERSEVERE”
In some ways, I feel badly for Marc Ash, Executive Director of Truthout.Org.
Thanks to Jason Leopold, he finds himself in quite a pickle. You may recall last May 13th that Mr. Leopold wrote in Truthout that Karl Rove had been indicted, that he had t…
That’s not what the Constitution or FISA has said at all (a panel of five FISA judges reported to congress that the program is not only legal, but essential and effective). I gotta call BS on ya, Anon.
Read Up.
Also, see Clinton and Carter’s responses to your assertions. During peacetime.
One of those truthout stories says “The case number is “06 cr 128.” On the federal court’s electronic database, “06 cr 128″ is listed along with a succinct summary: “No further information is available.”
This blows my mind. It’s such an easy thing to check on, and it just isn’t so. See for yourself:
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/formpage.html
It’s the old X-Files trick: String the audience along as long as you can, and when you paint yourself into a corner, just start a new subplot.
Lt, thanks for pre-empting me. But I gotta give the same props to AnonLib on the “double-down”. I’ve been saying that for years. The Libs always… always always ALWAYS double-down. Man, if that worked there wouldn’t be a casino in business in the world. I love it though. Long term the outcome is scarcely in doubt but short term it makes for quite a roller coaster. In the coming years you will see two, ten, a million Marc Ashes. It is what the True Believer MUST do. Eric Hoffer is instructive here. Many will, and I dare say already, many have collapsed out of active politics from the Rove Dissappointment and related brushes with reality but the hard kernel, the ones who base their sense of self-worth on this kind of claptrap CAN NOT abandon their conceits regardless of the facts. Rather they must bolster with intensity of certitude what melting possibilities steal from them daily. Their ultimate fate is not pretty. But pretty funny!
Comrades,
Ya know, it’s almost akin to a meditation mantra…. keep repeating the phrase, the thought, the concept. Eventually, it will become real. They want so hard to believe that their concepts, their wishes, are reality. It’s the Tinkerbell syndrom. Clap your hands and stomp your feet and holler real loud and Tinkerbell will come back to life…..
While they are all out trying to bring their fairy-tales to life, the rest of us have to roll up our sleeves and get to work to keep the barbarians away from the gates of civilization.
Respects,
Gwedd