Saturday, May 20, 2006

Rove watch: an "unindicted co-conspirator"?

More today on former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's role in the CIA leak investigation, here: New York Daily News - World & National Report - Ex-deputy secretary of state new figure in CIA leak probe...apparently Armitage is a key witness for Fitzgerald:
Armitage has been questioned several times, but is not expected to be indicted by the federal grand jury investigating who outed CIA spy Valerie Plame to journalists in 2003, sources said.

Armitage's testimony could hurt Vice President Cheney's indicted former chief aide Lewis (Scooter) Libby, or President Bush's political guru, Karl Rove.

Two sources familiar with the case said Armitage, Rove and Libby all had contacts with the press about Plame. Unlike Rove and Libby, Armitage appears to have tried to dissuade reporters from writing about her. (emphasis added)
Remember Novak's source whom he characterized as someone who was not a "partisan gunslinger"? Could have been Armitage, who along the lines of what's suggested here, tried to convince him not to write the story. And we all know how that turned out.

Another interesting development present in this article, the suggestion that could be named an "unindicted co-conspirator."
Even if Rove escapes indictment, he could still be forced to resign for talking about Plame with a Time magazine reporter.

"People don't seem to want to talk about the possibility that Karl could be named an unindicted co-conspirator," a third source close to the case said. "Can an unindicted co-conspirator remain at the White House? Personally, I don't think so."
In Bush's world, yeah, I'd say that's possible. I bet he'd be willing to try hanging on to Karl and see how it goes. Good luck if he tries. The outcry should be deafening.