Hmm, now there's a thought...
Sorta the Melanie Griffith of her time, eh?
Posted on 11/28/2005 6:03:52 AM PST by frankjr
The [TIME] reporter, Viveca Novak, who has written about the leak investigation, has been asked to testify by the special counsel in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, about her conversations with Robert D. Luskin, a lawyer for Mr. Rove, the magazine said.
...Ms. Novak had been asked to discuss conversations she had with Mr. Luskin, starting in May 2004, when she was covering the investigation.
...she has not been asked to appear before the grand jury but will instead give a deposition...
On Sunday, Mr. Luskin declined to comment, but he has previously said he expects that Mr. Fitzgerald will decide not to prosecute Mr. Rove...
Ms. Novak is not known to have had discussions with Mr. Rove or other White House officials about the C.I.A. officer during the summer of 2003...
Nevertheless, the summer and fall of 2004 was a significant time for Mr. Rove, according to lawyers in the case. It was then that Mr. Rove searched for and found an e-mail message he had written that led him to recall the July 2003 conversation with Mr. Cooper, the lawyers said.
Mr. Rove's e-mail message was sent on July 11, 2003, to Stephen J. Hadley, who was then the deputy national security adviser. The message said Mr. Rove had spoken to Mr. Cooper about issues in the leak case.
After its discovery, Mr. Rove provided the message to Mr. Fitzgerald, who had not been aware of it. Mr. Rove testified about the conversation with Mr. Cooper in a grand jury appearance in October 2004.
Even so, Mr. Fitzgerald has investigated Mr. Rove's assertions that he had forgotten the conversation with Mr. Cooper, and why he made no mention of it in his earlier testimony and in meetings with investigators, the lawyers said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
"However, in my unexpected role of TIME apologist, I will hazard this guess - suppose Special Counsel Fitzgerald is asking Ms. Novak about information she may have passed to Robert Luskin. Specifically, suppose Ms. Novak told Mr. Luskin in May of 2004 that Matt Cooper believed he was being subpoenaed to testify about his side of a conversation with Karl Rove.
Well, then - it is far from clear why her questions would be covered by any concept of source confidentiality. But if Luskin had been alerted in May 2004 that Cooper had talked top Rove, why did it take so long to discover the missing email?
It's just a guess. Now I'll tell you something that is not a guess - TIME ought to have explained this in their statement. Are they or are they not still attempting to protect their sources?
More links to possibly-relevant Viveca Novak articles here, and more links to follow. And as to how or why Fitzgerald discovered this link now, as opposed to a year ago, I have no idea."
Any relationship between Viveca and Bob Novak?
No relation on those two, but I'm beginning to wonder if Patrick Fitzgerald and Ronnie Earle may not be long lost cousins.
There was a little Asian girl (I think she was Asian) who testified at the end as to how the phone transfers work.
Cooper didn't get through to Libby until July 12th.
Now, why the hell would either Libby or Rove pass info "to spin" to a Dem Operative who is married to Mandy Grunwald who (by coincidence) is Hillary's best friend and MEDIA advisor. Mandy was also Bubba's campaign manager.
This whole thing was about getting rid of Rove so Mandy wouldn't be up against him when Hillary mounts her broom.
What about Kim?
Is it just me of has the whole Plame affair sunk to ridiculousness? And why is Fitzgerald being paid on my nickel to continue this foolishness?
LOL!
Indeed, but not "lost" enough to suit me.
Hmm, now there's a thought...
Sorta the Melanie Griffith of her time, eh?
Just when is this guy going to stop wasting the taxpayers money? She was not covert at the time of her so called "outing". The man who wrote the law says this does not even qualify. Could someone tell me why this partisan hack is allowed to continue with this drivel?
She was much better looking than Melanie Griffin, especially after Melanie aged a bit.
This Times reporter is no doubt expected to hang Rove, or she will lose her job at the Times, too.
Sorry, wrong company. My bad.
Not only that, Rove would not be privy to "Classified" information and would lose his security clearance. You can't decide what to do without background.
It's not like you can make Rove invisible. If he's around, you'd hear "convicted felon", "Security breech" 24/7 until he was back in the pasteur.
The Dems didn't have to distance themselves from Berger - the news media suddenly went comatose on that story.
"it must have been moonglow..."
Anyone who saw her dance with William Holden to the song Moonglow in the film Picnic will never forget her.
They are direct descendents of William Bligh
Fitz is apparently obsessed with proving that Rove deliberately covered up that July 11th convo with Cooper and nailing him with perjury charges for it. That is the only explanation for calling this reporter to talk about her discussions with Rove's lawyer. He must think that perhaps Luskin told Ms. Novak something about Rive's recollection or documentation that differed from what Rove told the GJ. But I don't think that is admissible in court, it is hearsay and Luskin cannot be called to testify against his client.
If Fitz is fishing for some inconsistency in Rove's testimony about the Cooper conversation, and tries to pin an indictment on this, it is going to look ridiculous, particularly after Woodward and Pincus publicly differed on the nature of THEIR conversation, and since Miller had also failed to remember one of her meetings with Libby. It is going to look like Fitz is selectiviely prosecuting only those targets who happen to be members of the Bush administration.
Can Fitzgerald break attorney-client privilege between Luskin and Rove by accusing Luskin of wrongdoing here? If so, he could compel Luskin to reveal everything he and Rove discussed. Besides opening that gold mine up to a grand jury, Fitzgerald would be sending a message to every attorney in DC - don't even think of trying to get in my way on this! I'd like to think that there's no way Fitzgerald could get away with such an outrageous abuse of his power, but with all the Dims and the MSM likely cheering such a move on, and with the general spinelessness of the GOP and their lack of any care beyond getting themselves re-elected, I just don't know any more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.