Rove Roller coaster... derailed?

Roller Coasters are great, wouldn't you say? Yesterday, I posted about Sealed v Sealed.

Yet, Monday the roller coaster took another sweeping curve and a huge drop when Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin pronounced to reporters that Fitzgerald has just told Karl Rove that he will not be indicted.
The White House and Rove are treating this pronouncement with enthusiasm, glad the roller coaster ride is over.

The announcement cheered Republicans and a White House beleaguered by war and low approval ratings.
Mark Corallo, a spokesman for Rove, said the White House official "is elated" and said that "we're done."

"In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation," Luskin said. "We believe the special counsel's decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove's conduct."

So the ride is done. Finished. Finito, right?

According to TPM Mukraker and Jason Leopold and Truthout this roller coaster ride is not done. Truthout hints that they believe Luskin has merely engineered a little side ride while the secret 'sealed v sealed' continues.

I reached Truthout editor Marc Ash on his cel phone this morning. "I wasn't aware that he had said that," he said of Luskin's announcement, but insisted that Truthout was "absolutely" standing by its earlier reporting.

"We've done a lot of work on this story, we've talked to a lot of people," he said, "and some of the people who provided information for the story are absolutely in a position to know."

So if Truthout's reporting -- by correspondent Jason Leopold -- is correct, is Ruskin lying? "Robert Luskin's allegations are in the best interest of his client, not necessarily the press," Ash said. "I think that the information he is providing is directly contradicted by the information we have."

This ride is a bigger thrill ride than the Demon Drop at Cedar Point.

However, in the past, Fitzgerald has scrupulously kept all news about the investigation quite silent. He does not leak information and he's careful about following the letter of the law. According to TPM, Luskin released a letter to the Press stating:"On June 12, 2006, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald formally advised us that he does not anticipate seeking charges against Karl Rove."; however, this does not follow any of the procedures Fitzgerald has done in this high profile case before.

Additionally, Fitzgerald or Fitzgerald's spokes person did not confirm this story at all. Until that is done, then the speculation will have to continue and we're just going to have to adapt to this non-ending roller coaster ride. Even the experienced Prosecutor at FiredogLake Christy Hardin Smith agrees with my take on this.
If Luskin is coming out and saying publicly that they got a letter from Pat Fitzgerald which says that Rove will not be charged, there are two things that I want to see and know: (1) what does the letter actually say, word for word; and (2) does it say something along the lines of "Please thank Karl for his cooperation in this matter."

Johnston has always seemed to have good sources within the Luskin/Rove camp (although, frankly, who didn’t last year when Luskin may have called every reporter in the universe). So it’s not surprising that Luskin would pick the NYTimes as his outlet for announcing news of a letter freeing-up Rove (if, indeed, that is what it fully does…although, I have to say, in all honesty, as an attorney you would never make an announcement like this without something in hand from the prosecutor which purports to say this — you’d never be taken seriously in any other case

Also she says:

I’ve said this before, and I will say it again: unless and until I hear it from Patrick Fitzgerald, the investigation continues to be ongoing. Which means that there are still potential developments down the road, should the evidence (like handwritten marching orders on the Wilson op-ed in Dick Cheney’s handwriting) lead there.

And I’ve also said this, and it is worth a reminder: Patrick Fitzgerald and his team are career professionals. You do not charge someone with a criminal indictment merely because they are scum. You have to have the evidence to back up any charges — not just that may indicate that something may have happened, but you must have evidence that criminal conduct occurred and that you can prove it. You charge the evidence you have, you try the case you can make, and you don’t go down a road that will ultimately be a waste of the public’s money and time once you have ascertained that the case is simply not there. It doesn’t mean that you don’t think the SOB that you can’t charge isn’t a weasel or guilty as hell, it just means that you can’t prove it. (And, fwiw(FYI?), those times are the worst of your career, because you truly hate to let someone go when you know in your gut they’ve done something wrong.)
Jeralyn has been saying all along that she thinks that Rove cut some sort of cooperation deal. I really want to see whatever wording was in (Luskin’s words) the letter from Fitzgerald before I get too far down this road on the what’s going on speculation. And I’m hoping that some enterprising reporter…cough…Murray…cough…will get the scoop on just what IS going on with all of this.

In his statement Mr. Luskin said he would not address other legal questions surrounding Mr. Fitzgerald’s decision. He added, "In deference to the pending case, we will not make any further public statements about the subject matter of the investigation. We believe that the Special Counsel’s decision should put an end to the baseless speculation about Mr. Rove’s conduct."

But it was evident that Mr. Fitzgerald’s decision followed an exhaustive inquiry into Mr. Rove’s activities that had brought the political strategist dangerously close to possible charges. In October, when Mr. Libby was indicted, people close to Mr. Rove had suggested that his involvement in the case would soon be over; speculation about Mr. Rove’s legal situation flared again in April when he made his fifth appearance before the grand jury.

Hmmm…interesting that Luskin, who has blathered about town about every hangnail that he’s ever witnessed on any person involved in this matter suddenly clams up, isn’t it? And that he mentions the ongoing investigation…and that he limits his comment on speculation to Rove and Rove alone. (Although, he is Rove’s paid attorney, so that does make sense in a "you pay my hourly rate and the other guys don’t" sort of way.)

So the ride continues...

Wheeeeeeeeee!!!!