Balls and Walnuts
more than you ever wanted to know
A cold, cold Fitzmas Eve
At the moment, Fitzmas Eve carries a damp chill, an overcast sky, and the promise of sleet, not snow. From the Wayne Madsen Report this morning (but see below* regarding Madsen’s credibility):
Even before WMR reported on Rove’s likely indictment yesterday, there were clear signs that something was amiss. Rather than keep Rove out of the public eye, the White House put him out in front of the neocon American Enterprise Institute on Monday, had him arm twisting GOP members of Congress during the week, and had him fly to Lake County, Illinois Friday night for a GOP fundraiser and pep talk. Washington insiders report that if the White House were confident that Rove would soon be indicted, they would refrain from having him out among GOP ranks taking part in future embarrassing photo ops. Which brings us back to yesterday’s item about the power of the Special Counsel as opposed to that of an Independent Special Counsel. Even Watergate independent counsel Archibald Cox was not immune enough to prevent him from being fired by Richard Nixon. (Although the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General refused to fire Cox and resigned, the dirty work was carried out by the Solicitor General, Robert Bork). Fitzgerald is merely protected by a series of Justice Department administrative directives and not by anything even close to an Independent Counsel Statute. In taking on the most powerful and unconstitutional administration in the history of the United States, Fitzgerald’s brief is certainly vulnerable to pressure from the White House. And it is clear that something drastic followed the May 12 meeting at Patton & Boggs.
Hat tip to Dean for pointing me to WMR.
My emphasis. Meanwhile, Truthout’s executive director, Marc Ash, coughed up a “partial apology” for the premature announcement of Rove’s indictment (thanks to Tennessee Guerilla Women for this one):
The time has now come, however, to issue a partial apology to our readership for this story. While we paid very careful attention to the sourcing on this story, we erred in getting too far out in front of the news-cycle. In moving as quickly as we did, we caused more confusion than clarity. And that was a disservice to our readership and we regret it.
“Getting too far out in front of the news-cycle” . . . waaaaah? That makes no sense at all. Either Jason Leopold’s story is true or it isn’t. A “partial apology” is like partial child support for a partial claim of paternity.
As I mentioned over at Kos, the Bush Admin may be taking the tack that it’s better to quash the indictment at the source than risk the shitstorm a presidential pardon would bring. WMR suggests the Administration might do just that. But can they silence Fitzpatrick?
D.
*PS: I’ve cross-posted my Yes Virginia, there will be a Fitzmas story at Kos. Several of the commenters there have indicated that Madsen is a less than reliable source — this thread, for example.
Still, I think Madsen may have a point about Fitzgerald’s limitations.
Politics Bush Karl Rove Indicted Rove Fitzmas Patrick Fitzgerald Valerie Plame Jason Leopold
Eh. Oh, well.
Frankly, I don’t think that the White House will be able to get away with squashing an indictment. The best that that would do is push the shitstorm down the road a bit, and it would be all the bigger for it.
This whole story is really confusing.
Depressing, isn’t it? I almost wish Fitz were a bit less honest — you know, maybe he could leak stuff here and there like Ken Starr.
Naw. Then he wouldn’t be my hero anymore.