NRO article on Rove mania...
It turns out it was Matt Cooper who called Rove about a completely different matter of welfare reform before changing the subject to Wilson near the end of the conversation.
Luskin told NRO that the circumstances of Rove's conversation with Cooper undercut Time's suggestion of a White House "war on Wilson." According to Luskin, Cooper originally called Rove — not the other way around — and said he was working on a story on welfare reform. After some conversation about that issue, Luskin said, Cooper changed the subject to the weapons of mass destruction issue, and that was when the two had the brief talk that became the subject of so much legal wrangling. According to Luskin, the fact that Rove did not call Cooper; that the original purpose of the call, as Cooper told Rove, was welfare reform; that only after Cooper brought the WMD issue up did Rove discuss Wilson — all are "indications that this was not a calculated effort by the White House to get this story out."
Rove was trying to warn Cooper that Wilson was not being truthful about how he was chosen for the Niger mission when he said VP Dick Cheney and Director of CIA authorized him for the trip. This was confirmed in the Senate Intelligence Committe report issued back in July 2004 which determined that Wilson's wife recommended him for the job. He was telling Cooper this because Rove knew later that same day CIA Director George Tenent was going to make a public statement saying that very thing.
Luskin points out that on the evening of July 11, 2003, just hours after the Rove-Cooper conversation, then-CIA Director George Tenet released a statement that undermined some of Wilson's public assertions about his report.
For more on Joe Wilson's lying see Powerline and theWall Street Journal.
Secondly it was not a last minute dramatic call from Rove letting Matt Cooper know he could reveal his source. Rove signed a general waiver back in Decemer 2003 or January 2004 for "any person" to disclose what Rove had said. But it wasn't until the day that Cooper was poised to go to jail did he finally take advantage of the waiver. He could have done that 18 months ago but did not.
Luskin also shed light on the waiver that Rove signed releasing Cooper from any confidentiality agreement about the conversation. Luskin says Rove originally signed a waiver in December 2003 or in January 2004 (Luskin did not remember the exact date). The waiver, Luskin continues, was written by the office of special prosecutor Fitzgerald, and Rove signed it without making any changes — with the understanding that it applied to anyone with whom he had discussed the Wilson/Plame matter. "It was everyone's expectation that the waiver would be as broad as it could be," Luskin says.
Cooper and New York Times reporter Judith Miller have expressed concerns that such waivers (top Cheney aide Lewis Libby also signed one) might have been coerced and thus might not have represented Rove's true feelings. Yet from the end of 2003 or beginning of 2004, until last Wednesday, Luskin says, Rove had no idea that there might be any problem with the waiver.
It was not until that Wednesday, the day Cooper was to appear in court, that that changed. "Cooper's lawyer called us and said, "Can you confirm that the waiver encompasses Cooper?" Luskin recalls. "I was amazed. He's a lawyer. It's not rocket science. [The waiver] says 'any person.' It's that broad.
The media's hysteria over this non-issue is laughable, just watch the White House daily press conference to see what I mean. Pay close attention to Terry Moran and David Gregory, they are the most entertaining of the WHPC.
Comments
Post a Comment