Wayne Madsen, whom I have not read previously, is reporting there will be an announcement of Karl Rove's indictment Friday. His story somewhat tracks Jason's Leopold's article, except he says the meeting at Luskin's office Friday was not for 15 hours, Rove wasn't given 24 hours to get his affairs in order and he adds that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales met with the grand jury on May 12 and was advised by them that Rove would be indicted.Jeralyn Merritt also has an extensive list of background articles on this issue at the bottom of this post.WMR can report tonight on more details concerning the confusing reports regarding Karl Rove and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald from last Friday. WMR can confirm that the appearance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Grand Jury at the US Federal Courthouse in Washington was a formality in which the jury informed the Attorney General of their decision to indict Karl Rove. That proceeding lasted for less than 30 minutes and took place shortly after noon. Gonzales's personal security detachment was present in the courthouse during the Grand Jury briefing. From the courthouse, Gonzales's motorcade proceeded directly down Constitution Avenue to the Department of Justice.Madsen says that some of Jason's information may have emanated from within the Rove camp as a means of deflection. He also writes:
According to sources within the Patton and Boggs law firm, Karl Rove was present at the law firm's building on M Street. WMR was told by a credible source that a Patton and Boggs attorney confirmed that Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove.Madsen reported the Gonzales-grand jury meeting regarding Libby on his website in October, 2005 but then he said the date was October 19, not October 21.
In the Scooter Libby case last October, after the Grand Jury decided to indict Libby on Friday, October 21 and the Attorney General personally heard the decision the same day at a meeting with the jury, the actual indictment was issued the following Friday, October 28. Several sources have told WMR that an announcement concerning the indictment of Rove will be made on Friday, May 19 generally following the same scenario from October 28, 2005 -- the posting of the indictment on the Special Prosecutor's web site followed by a press conference at Main Justice.
Is this inside information, or putting two and two together that an Indictment will be announced Friday? Has he just tweaked Jason's article to remove the points receiving the most skepticism: (1) the meeting was 15 hours, (2) Rove was given 24 hours to get his affairs in order and (3) the grand jury had already returned the Indictment and Fitzgerald handed it to Luskin and Rove?
Madsen's observations about Gonzales being at the grand jury last Friday stem from his own scouting:May 13, 2006 -- Yesterday afternoon, WMR was staked out at the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington awaiting any developments in the CIA leak case. A little after noon, a large motorcade consisting of black and one green SUV, several police cars and police motorcycles sped into the street behind the courthouse. Two SUVs split from the motorcade and quickly dashed into the underground parking garage. Several personal security officers were spotted on guard in the annex of the courthouse where the CIA leak case grand jury was meeting. Although there is no final confirmation that the motorcade was that of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, there is every indication that he spent approximately a little under 30 minutes in the courthouse.Has any other media source reported that Gonzales met with the Libby grand jury on October 21 or with the Rove grand jury on May 12?
Last October, Gonzales made a similar trip in an identical motorcade to the courthouse on a Friday to hear the decision of the grand jury investigating Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. The Attorney General's appearance at the grand jury is a formality and there is an opportunity for him to pose questions to the jury. After last October's visit to the grand jury, Gonzales informed the White House that Libby was to be indicted. One week later, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald delivered a five count indictment against Libby.
Madsen also fingers a lawyer at Patton Boggs as a source -- although not his direct source:
"WMR was told by a credible source that a Patton and Boggs attorney confirmed that Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove."
So it's hearsay....A lawyer told a source of Madsen's who told Madsen. Wouldn't this lawyer be discovered, fired and face disciplinary action for leaking privileged information about a client of the firm?
If this lawyer-rat does exist, it sounds like he or she may also be one of Jason's sources, in which case, he or she gave different informaton to Jason than to Madsen's source. Considering that Madsen is a former NSA officer, and former CIA Analyst Larry Johnson and Joseph Wilson reportedly have received similar information, it's beginning to sound like a close-knit group of sources.
There's another similarity between Jason and Madsen's reporting -- some inapt terminology. Madsen reports Luskin was advised Friday that Rove had become a "subject." Rove has always been a "subject." The issue was whether he was a "target." Either Madsen got the terms mixed up or his source relaying the information from the Patton Boggs lawyer is not a lawyer and got them mixed up-- just as some of the legal details in Jason's report sounded off.
Here is Madsen's bio.
I do think Rove will be indicted. Friday has seemed like the most logical day for a while. If Madsen is correct that the Libby grand jury voted on October 21 although the Indictment wasn't filed until October 28, and we learn on May 19 that Rove is indicted, then Jason may also have been correct in saying the grand jury had already indicted Rove by the afternoon of May 12 when Fitz met with Team Rove. Jason's article did say the Indictment would be revealed during sometime this week but the date was unsure.
Is this just a case of the same people spinning both Madsen and Jason? Or was Jason correct except for minor details and Madsen is also correct, just refining some of those details?
I doubt we will ever learn whether Fitz really met with Luskin last Friday. I'm not sure it matters, other than if they did meet, then Team Rove lied in denying it and the blogosphere owes Jason an apology for relentlessly bashing him this week.
But, as I said at the beginning, I don't know Wayne Madsen so I don't know whether his report is credible, or just a rehash of Jason's with the most skeptical portions removed.
One last note: I've been talking a lot about a sealed indictment, but if Fitzgerald just sat on the Indictment after the grand jury returned it without filing it, there's no reason for him to ask for it to be sealed now. He'd just file it Friday a few minutes before the press conference. I still think there are issues with Rule 6(e) if he shared the signed Indictment with Luskin and Rove ahead of time, as it would be a "matter occurring before the grand jury." Of course, as I also pointed out once before, he could have shared a list of the charges he intended to submit to the grand jury, or a proposed plea agreement that contained the charges on which he intended to indict Rove.
I guess we'll all have to just wait and see. If tomorrow is really the date, the mainstream media should be all over it by this afternoon.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
"Another Internet Report of Karl Rove Indictment"