Notification of ‘Target’ Status: Rove’s Red Herring
Notification of ‘Target’ Status: Rove’s Red Herring
On Wednesday, following Karl Rove’s fifth appearance before a grand jury, his lawyer Robert Luskin released a statement. Much has been made of this portion:
In connection with this appearance, the special counsel has advised Mr. Rove that he is not a target of the investigation. Mr. Fitzgerald has affirmed that he has made no decision concerning charges.
The United States Grand Jury Manual defines a “target†as “a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime.†On Thursday, MSNBC’s David Shuster provided an important bit of context:
I don’t think there is any chance [Rove] will resign absent an indictment. Perhaps that’s why the stakes are so high. Scooter Libby only got notification that he was the target that very morning. He didn’t have time. It doesn’t look like Karl Rove will get advanced notification either if he gets indicted.
Karl Rove may or may not be indicted. But the fact that he hasn’t been notified that he is a target of the investigation should not provide him or his supporters much comfort.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Who is this Grand Jury Manuel? Is he an immigrant? Any relation to Emanuel Lewis?
April 29th, 2006 at 10:26 pmWell, I am not dancing the schadenfreude polka yet, but I can’t help tapping my feet to the rhythm of Karl squirming.
April 29th, 2006 at 10:39 pmAnd Rush Limbaugh is not guilty. Is there water on Mars? Does the intelligence community feed Pat Robertson the greatest lies? Does Richard Cheney think he is John Adams?
April 29th, 2006 at 10:52 pmUnfortunately, the outcome of this whole charade is, more or less, pre-ordained. There’s no chance that any of these guys is going to jail. Bush will pardon them on his way out of office, just as his father pardoned Weinberger and others.
April 29th, 2006 at 10:54 pmThey’re all going down, and they’re taking everybody with them.
April 29th, 2006 at 10:58 pmWhen you tell the truth the first time there’s no need to testify a second, third, fourth, of fifth time.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:06 pmBest not to speculate until Karl Rove is indicted, but even if Fitzgerald does so Bush will pardon him if convicted, because Bush is the one who told him to leak the info on Plame to the press! Dubya himself should be indicted for conspiracy in this whole sordid CIA affair!
April 29th, 2006 at 11:07 pm“IN CONNECTION WITH THIS APPEARANCE” is a critical phrase.
I think Karl got his letter at the same time Scooter did and fast talking by his lawyer, who promised that Vivica would exonerate Rove is the only thing that got him out of trouble then.
Meaning that Fitz has been sitting on a sealed indictment, to which he may or may not add charges as a result of what he has heard since last October.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:14 pm
They used that line for months with Libby too. Claimed he wasn’t a target — until someone finally pointed out that target is a legal term and that the step before target is subject and Libby was a subject of the investigation. (And, you don’t need to be notified that you’re a subject.)
It’s parsing words. They can honestly say he’s not a target because it has a specific, defined, legal meaning, but all the uninformed public thinks — as they’re meant to by the declaration — that he’s in the clear.
I loved it when network legal experts finally pointed out the distinction several months ago. Taking the air out of their comments designed to be inferred incorrectly leaves them with nothing or the whole truth — not the grey area they like to tread in between.
Most folks don’t take too kindly to only being told the technical truth.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:15 pmI just worry what idjit will do or think up, when ROve is gone. Scares the shit out of me.
“Give me liberty or give them death”
April 29th, 2006 at 11:20 pm#4 George C, great point, I have always why Cap Weinberger had to be pardoned.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:20 pmwondered
April 29th, 2006 at 11:22 pmAnyone see Steven Colbert at the Washington Press Corespondents dinner on MSNBC tonight? One of the best parts was when he was playing the new WH Press Secretary with past film clips cut in, he asked a half sleeping Karl Rove if he was paying attention and focused on Karl’s note pad that had large heart with an arrow through it and said Karl + Steven.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:27 pmThe past few days the Bush loving trolls have been very upset with ThinkProgress and with those who oppose Dubya Dunce Decider on here > lol. Karl Rove is desperately trying to get his paid operatives on TP to change the subject, but so far they have failed!
April 29th, 2006 at 11:34 pmBecause Cap Weinburger had his assistant military attache transferring weapons from the DOD stockpiles to CIA stockpiles, the attache a Gen. Colin Powell was to testify about what he did under orders from the sitting sec of def in the 80’s during Ronald Reagans time in office. The weapons were covertly sent to Israel to replaced ones that were sold to Iran for the release of hostages held in Lebonon, after Reagan stated publically we did not negociate with terrorists. The money made on the3 sales was used to fund the Contras in El Salvador in direct violation of Congressional mandate which is LAW. thus CAP Weinburger broke the law……(and thus GHWB had to pardon him to keep other skelatons deep in the closet)
April 29th, 2006 at 11:35 pmKarl is going to split like a cockroach stepped on by an angry housewife when he is officially labled a “target.” And, he will be come persona non grata and folks will be disavowing him so fast, the bloom off his turd blossom will wilt and smell just like it never had a flower.
April 29th, 2006 at 11:36 pmFrom the manual:
and:
Note that 9-11.154 does not apply to “a subject” of a Grand Jury investigation, only a ‘target’.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:07 amPerhaps they see him as a “flight risk”, and don’t want to take any chances.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:09 amit’s WAY past my bedtime…watched the correspondants dinner twice on c-span…
FABULOUS. A MUST SEE.
c-span will be running it again sunday (?)…
crooksandliars has a story and some video
i’ve been reading the comments there – concensus is colbert was fantastic, pure biting satire of the best kind – not a lot of laughter in the room – but YOU will “get it”
April 30th, 2006 at 1:26 amthe wingnuts will be bashing him with a passion – they all thought he was on their side…
he he he… “muchos huevos grandes” – gotta love it…
Speaking of targets… the fellahs in the federal penitentiary are sizing up Rove’s mushy butt.
April 30th, 2006 at 1:40 am# 19 :Nochey noche.
April 30th, 2006 at 2:02 amEditor and Publisher said that Skunk Baxter was in the Correspondent’s Dinner audience, IN A KILT!
Looking for a little “Jeff on Jeff” action?
Who says you can’t buy a thrill?
A another middle-aged midnight cruiser, reelin’ in the years and looking to do it again?
April 30th, 2006 at 2:41 am# 22 barfly:Only you and me know who you really are.You should be ashamed.May your next Steely Dan tune thrust out your eardrums.Didn’t Braveheart wear a kilt?
April 30th, 2006 at 2:53 amIt’s probably true that Bush will pardon Rove. That’s a sad truth. But a Rove
April 30th, 2006 at 5:47 amindictment will force him to resign. This is important because he will not be able to do further damage especially to the upcoming Novermber’s elections because all his energy and attention will be on his legal case.
It would be a service to this country if everyone in the W.H. was indicted on Charges to DeFraud the Citizens of The United States Of America.
April 30th, 2006 at 7:53 amBush will pardon him, and scotter, and dick, and anyone else, probably even delay for all we know, in his last hours. Typical crap.
R2K
April 30th, 2006 at 8:52 amJust a tiny thought for our Sunday morning posters. Bush will not be able to pardon if we get him impeached………..Blessings
April 30th, 2006 at 9:44 amPost 27 Yes if Bush and Cheney are both impeached, then they cannot pardon Rove or anybody else, but I do not believe the Congress even after November elections would have the guts to impeach them?! The Republicans in Congress will do anything to protect the Bush Regime and the Democrats in DC are so afraid to stand-up that they have become spineless jellyfish! If the Dems take back the House and/or Senate, but do NOTHING, then Americans most likely would be forced to take to the streets and overthrow the federal government?!
April 30th, 2006 at 9:55 amBush will not be able to pardon if we get him impeached………..Blessings
Comment by Sharon Cox — April 30, 2006 @ 9:44 am
Sharon, are you crazy> Logic like that? Really – what are you thinking? ; ) Just kidding of course.
Have you seen the latest trend of people using public property to put up ‘Impeach’ banners and signs all over the country? It’s really cool. I think people are beginning to catch on. Well, at least I hope so. And maybe if gas goes up to $5 a gallon it will force more of the Republicans to start abandoning the extreme right? One can only hope I suppose…
April 30th, 2006 at 10:05 amthen Americans most likely would be forced to take to the streets and overthrow the federal government?!
Comment by Jay Randal — April 30, 2006 @ 9:55 am
And with the way they’ve mistreated our troops, I think it’s safe to say that we’ll have their support when the time comes. And it seems more and more likely that it will be ‘when’ and not ‘if’.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:08 amOne other thing, if there’s anyone who has their own political website, please think about dedicating a portion of your site to the U.S. people forming an alliance with the Iranian people. They don’t hate us any more than we hate them. And, if anything, they want their crazy lunatic President out of office as much as we want ours out. No one wants this conflict but our megalomanical leaders.
We need to capitalize on our joint sympathies for one another by letting the Iranian people know that we share their disdain for Bush and Ahmadinejad and do not want a war with their country. Maybe it is time for the will of the people to be heard and used for peace. After all, there is strength in numbers.
Just something pro-active to consider.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:15 amPost 30 I would prefer the Congress to impeach them, but if they fail to do so then they force Americans to take to the streets to get rid of the Bush Regime?!
April 30th, 2006 at 10:18 amI would prefer the Congress to impeach them, but if they fail to do so then they force Americans to take to the streets to get rid of the Bush Regime?!
Comment by Jay Randal — April 30, 2006 @ 10:18 am
As would most of us. But as each day goes by with more and more criminal behavior and zero action, the less likely I believe it will happen. And that it will be up to us to do something about it.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:25 amThe US is bound and determined that it is not going to meet diplomatically with Iran. See the US hop, skip and jump?
You know, I haave been hearing for 5 years now that Iran has nuclear capabilities. How can that be when they just processed their first little bit of uranium material?
I hope you all see what is happening. Iraq all over again. Of course, after Iran is attacked and becomes a quagmire, officials will all deny that they said Iran was a nuclear threat.
April 30th, 2006 at 10:32 amWhile I understand the notion of a “target letter”, it seems to be given more weight than it deserves. The vast majority of crime is dealt with by the issuance of a warrant and a knock on the door after which the alleged criminal is handcuffed and taken into custody. Perhaps its simply the difference between white collar crime and the vast majority of crime. Regardless, a crime is a crime and should the Grand Jury feel one has been committed, the end game is the same. All the speculation is fun, but I’m ready for the main event.
read more observations here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
April 30th, 2006 at 10:46 amGood posts, Jay, Unbelievable and Paul. We indeed do have a lot to do and much more to undo from this administrations evil deeds.
Did you all read about Bush O.K. ing the Dubi buying some big military building businesses from England owned companies.? Operating here in the good old USof A…..
Have you read the new book of Noam Chomskys “Failed States”.? I’m in the middle of the book, very good…..
Addressing our problems, that are many, both from the right and lazy, spinless, enabeling left we are going to have to hit the streets in mass numbers and now we will be overshadowed by the illegal immigrant problems.
Many things are created by this terrible regime, like the home front uprisings. I believe the underlieing causes are still to keep our heads full of their crap while they do worse behind the scenes.
Our only hope is for the majority of the public to realise that this bunch is worse than Hitler was , will join us before it is to late and take our country back…….Blessings
April 30th, 2006 at 11:01 amMr. DiRito,
there is a great deal of significance associated with a “target letter” in a Grand Jury proceeding. Take a look at my above post #17. I can’t go into anymore detail than that until after I pass the bar. Suffice to say “targets” are treated significantly different than “subjects.”
We’ve been waiting months for the shoe to drop on Rove. It’s a pretty fair bet that there are people waiting in the wings to charge Fitzpatrick with prosecutorial misconduct should he indicte Rove. He’s going to have to draw up a pretty solid case to move to that step.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:05 amHave you read “The Prince” by Machiavelli? This administration, Rove especially, is a master at such tactics.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:13 am#19 “(Él) tiene muchos huevos”, or “(Él) tiene unos huevos muy grandes” are better constructions in spanish, “muchos huevos grandes” is a bit repetitive and sounds as if he had a farm (huevos=eggs) :)
#21 Nighty night =~ Hasta mañanita.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:47 am# 39 : Thanks for the ‘correccion’.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:03 pmKarl Rove may or may not be indicted.
Uh oh… Think Progress admitting that Rove might not be indicted… I think that’s an ominous sign…
April 30th, 2006 at 12:07 pmI think that’s an ominous sign…
Comment by Seixon — April 30, 2006 @ 12:07 pm
That you’re paranoid? Well, we have been trying to tell you for weeks now.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:13 pm# 22 barfly:Only you and me know who you really are.You should be ashamed.May your next Steely Dan tune thrust out your eardrums.Didn’t Braveheart wear a kilt?
Comment by GURU^ — April 30, 2006 @ 2:53 am
So enlighten me; who am I really? Why should I be ashamed?
Yeah Braveheart wore a kilt, A FEW CENTURIES AGO.
And may your next Air Supply tune cause you to stick your head in the oven.
April 30th, 2006 at 12:15 pm# 43 barfly:Be ashamed for being a lying bigot.You couldn’t wipe Jeff ‘Skunk’ Baxter’s ass,though you would probably like to.Why so fixated on the kilt,clown?I know who you are.I’ll listen to some Doobie Bros.for you later on,since you like Air Supply so much.
April 30th, 2006 at 1:22 pmPost 43 barfly > thanks for the laugh and the putdown of GURU > lol.
April 30th, 2006 at 1:27 pm# 45 Jay: I may or may not deserve the putdown;but it makes no sense to cut ‘Skunk’ or kilts.Here is the equation-Jay Randal=barfly=katy.
April 30th, 2006 at 1:51 pmEvil Spaniard, thanks for the Spanish lesson.
April 30th, 2006 at 1:53 pmHuevos muchos grande is Setphen Colbert’s term for what we would call brass balls, as you likely already know.
You point out it is grammatically incorrect – duly noted by those of us who try to say things correctly- but Colbert’s satirical impersonation of a pompous, clueless, know-it-all newsman sort of fits with the mis-translation, doesn’t it?
Colbert was brilliant on C-Span last night — The king and Laura were not amused, it appeared to me.
That’s OK, many of us were not amused when the boy-king made fun of the lack of WMDs in Iraq after so many had vainly died in the invasion and search.
The king and Laura were not amused, it appeared to me.
Comment by Marie — April 30, 2006 @ 1:53 pm
The look on Chimp’s face when they announced Colbert was priceless. Apparently, an aspiring comic himself, Bush seemed to know that Colbert is satire (I’m not convinced most of the neo-cons know this fact).
April 30th, 2006 at 2:02 pmPost 46 GURU > lol I am NOT katy or anybody else! You could be I-Right-I or ANVIL for all I know > lol.
April 30th, 2006 at 2:15 pmGet him. Get. Him. Get’im.
Make him pay, imagine his victims.
The world is his victim.
Power is rarely aligned with good.
But this may be the first time it was aligned with pure evil.
April 30th, 2006 at 2:54 pmLet’s sing along with ‘Skunk’ and the boys:Jay,you sing tenor.
”You were Lady [katy,barfly] Bayside
There was nothing that I could do
So I pointed my car down Seventh Avenue.”
”Bring back the Boston Rag
April 30th, 2006 at 3:33 pmTell all your buddies
That it ain’t no drag
Bring back the Boston Rag.”……..———[....]mine
In connection with “this appearance.” He could have received a target letter previously.
April 30th, 2006 at 4:24 pmPer Shuster’s comments, was Libby ever told he was not a target? It doesn’t seem like they could renege on Rove after telling him he wasn’t a target, can they?
April 30th, 2006 at 4:39 pmThe fact that Judd thinks the liberal opinions of David Shuster provide “an important bit of context” says a lot about Judd – none of it flattering. Hey, Judd, we all know you’re drooling over the theoretical possibility of another indictment, but think about this: maybe the case against Libby is so weak that Fitzgerald needs to beef it up by putting Rove back on the hot seat.
BTW, Judd, I’ve noticed that you finally dropped any pretext that this is about something princiipled, like the nobility of risking one’s career to serve a higher truth. I guess Mary McCarthy kind of screwed that one up for your side, didn’t she? Good. Now you can just stop pretending that this is anything more than plain old vicious politics at its worst. Since you can’t beat Bush, you haul his closest advisor up in front of a grand jury. George Washington would be SO proud!
In any event, David Shuster’s opinion is no better than yours or mine until something new actually happens. Until then, maybe you should try to be more “fair & balanced” about this matter – seeing as how a man’s liberty is at stake.
April 30th, 2006 at 4:58 pmPost 54 > Judd does NOT care what you think about him > lol. So call him names and call all of us who oppose Bush “stupid” if you like, but we all know you are paid by Karl Rove to post on TP!
April 30th, 2006 at 5:52 pmI know who you are.I’ll listen to some Doobie Bros.for you later on,since you like Air Supply so much.
Comment by GURU^ — April 30, 2006 @ 1:22 pm
Sounds very threatening;”I know who you are.” Obviously not if you think I’m Jay. My point was the kilt(originally); it typified the over-the-top nature of some rock and rollers. Do you seriously think the glimmer twins (Becker and Fagen), would show up at a public event in a kilt?
Your comprehension skills ain’t so great today; what makes you think I like Air Supply? Try re-reading my post if you’re so confused (which you must be, if you think I’m Jay). Steely Dan was a better band after Baxter anyway. I was trying to (humorously) work all of the titles of “Can’t buy a Thrill” into a narrative – And since you clocked in at after 2 O’clock on a Sunday morning to tell me your opinion, it seems I wasn’t the only one bored and looking for something to do. You DO know why Baxter was there don’t you, O Guru? Since you are “enlightened,” I don’t need to tell you do I? So, Guru tell us your take on why he was there; is he a “correspondent?”
April 30th, 2006 at 6:35 pmPost 56 barfly > I have NO idea why GURU thinks you are me, or I am you? He also thinks we are both katy > lol. GURU could be ANVILHEAD or I-R-I?
April 30th, 2006 at 7:08 pmthanks for that spanish lesson, evil spaniard #39, and to marie for helping to clear that up…
here is the wiki-explanation of colbert’s award…
i caught a couple of morning shows before i left for a road trip – not one mention of colbert’s performance last night … but that bush-stunt-double got raves…
sacriligious maybe, but i routinely say a little prayer to my 8×10 of patrick fitzgerald posted above my computer here… please please please … and may the gods protect you for your courage and tenacity… i have much hope after the guilty verdict of my former governor ryan…
April 30th, 2006 at 7:20 pmwell, jay, my post above may have added fuel to guru’s addled brain fire…
April 30th, 2006 at 7:25 pmi can’t figure out what his deal is – begining to sound like a meth freak though…
he needs help… santo has volunteered to “relieve” his stress in chicago in a couple of weeks – sure hopes that works…
Post 57 Jay Randall:
I think he’s been up all night; he must think that because we pop in and out (I’m writing a column right now, and can’t do more that) that we’re somehow the same person phantom-trolling the comments board under assumed names.
Ironic for a “Guru”, whose supposed to “know all.”
April 30th, 2006 at 9:02 pmP.S. I don’t know why Skunk was there,but I think he is a high-tech,W.M.D.expert,and actually works for the govt.If you know more,tell me.
”And if I claim to be a wise man
April 30th, 2006 at 10:10 pmIt surely means that I don’t know.”
Lol I do not understand all these different GURU posts, but post 61 you are a nasty troll!
April 30th, 2006 at 11:13 pmFrom an interview he gave a short time back:
Gangel: What does he [Baxter] bring to the table that other defense experts don’t?
General Henry Obering: In a word: out-of-the-box thinking.
Gangel: Which means?
Obering: Meaning that he comes at problems and he comes at challenges that we may face with a very different perspective.
Gangel: Is there an example you can give me that’s not classified?
Obering: Very few. But when we were looking at how we could build some of the building blocks in the missile defense system, he brought some very innovative ideas.
Apparently not THAT innovative; the freaking thing STILL doesn’t work worth a damn! But I’ll bet those checks he gets as a member of the Potomac institute cash just fine…
Isn’t “Guru” kind of false advertising? You sure aren’t all-knowing, or you’d know Skunk is a think-tank wonk.
Boy, you sure get warped about a little thing like a kilt. Let me guess; you’re also a kilt wearer? I guess it WOULD make contemplating your navel easier.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:51 pmbarfly,
You say it like it’s a bad thing. I, for one, am proud of my Scottish Ancestry. I own two kilts and play the bagpipes. In fact, I piped “Amazing Grace” at the State of the Union Protest last January.
If you must be homophobic, do not put all your paranoia onto the Scots. Just because you are so insecure about your own sexuality as to be intimidated by the thought of wearing a kilt does not mean the rest of us are.
And, FYI, the belt line of the kilt, when worn properly, is at the navel, so wearing a kilt would make it very difficult for one to contemplate one’s own navel.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:22 am…….
May 1st, 2006 at 1:29 am”Down to Green Street
There you go
Lookin’ so outrageous
And they tell you so
You should know
How all the pros play the game
You change your name.”
…….
# 65 Briseadh na Faire :
Thank you——-Gracias——-Merci——-Grati—–
And I love bagpipes too.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:41 am# 68 should read # 66
And to # 65 barfly:Not to pile on after you’ve been rebuked,but a GURU never claims omniscience.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:50 amI’ts getting worse for you barfly,even Jay Randal excoriate’s you in post# 64.
May 1st, 2006 at 2:08 am“BUT YAR ARRRRRRRRRRRE BLANCHE,
YAR ARRRRRRRRRRRRE!”
lol
May 1st, 2006 at 8:50 amPost 69 GURU > you are a certified nut > my post is 63 not 64! Lay off the booze it shows > lol.
May 1st, 2006 at 10:47 ambarfly/katy,c’mon,answer down with me.
May 1st, 2006 at 10:50 am…..can’t take another rebuke? ya puke.
# 72 Jay:Better look again,ya slob.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:00 am…..Looks like that jism has you a little groggy.
Lol again GURU my last post was 71 not 72 > so you are seeing things differently on here or your brain is fried or both > lol.
May 1st, 2006 at 11:39 amBetween #50 and # 51 it should say
”Yea,Jay,maybe not,but you must be a real pu**y to go along with that s**t.”
It was deleted,then I saw it,now I don’t.Could be source of confusion.
May 1st, 2006 at 12:09 pmBut did you or not call barfly a ‘nasty troll’. If not, I just gave you the reason.
And if not Briseadh na Faire sure did.
ok guru – last time – seems you missed it, again:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/26/thinkfast-april-26-2006/#comment-525561
May 1st, 2006 at 12:11 pmkaty;missed what? You can type,please explain.
P.S. I knew you would be back.
..”That room full of noise
May 1st, 2006 at 12:26 pmAnd dangerous boy’s
Still makes you thirsty and hot.”
click on the link dumbass…
May 1st, 2006 at 12:30 pmLook,katy,no need to get snippy with me.I clicked it on and the only thing I saw was:
..”I could be wrong,but I’m not;no I’m not.”
May 1st, 2006 at 12:57 pmGURU my post 63 was calling you a nasty troll > you are a silly obnoxious one too > lol.
May 1st, 2006 at 1:34 pmWe all know from Clinton that perjury and obstruction are not crimes, especially for a silly non-crime like exposing a non-spy who loves to be photographed.
May 1st, 2006 at 6:29 pmKitty;she was an asset of the C.I,A..So was her front Co..She was outed and the Co. exposed,and that hurts us all.
May 2nd, 2006 at 12:24 amBack on target, rover is about to go down in flames.
The administration is rearranging chairs on the deck of the Hindenburg.
May 2nd, 2006 at 1:42 pmLet’s hope it turns out that way,but just his administration:not everyone else with them.
..”Looking behind me, the waters turn icy-blue
May 3rd, 2006 at 2:03 amThe lights are dimmed,and once again
The stage is set for you.”
[...] Notification of ‘Target’ Status: Rove’s Red Herring [...]
June 13th, 2006 at 7:29 am[...] Notification of ‘Target’ Status: Rove’s Red Herring [...]
June 13th, 2006 at 7:29 am