To say I am absent of a ‘legal mind’ is an understatement. Based on that, the events this week pertaining to the Perjury trial of I Lewis Libby have raised some questions in my tiny little brain about potential expansion of the case to re-introduce conspiracy charges against Karl Rove (Dick Cheney, et. al.)
Yesterday, I read that both Karl Rove and Dan Bartlett were subpoenaed (to their chagrin, it seems) to testify for Libby’s defense. In doing this, Rove, specifically is in danger of uncovering a lot about his role in the outing of Valarie Plame, something for which he has moved mountains to bury.
From MSNBC.com: (Newsweek)
Will Rove Testify?
By Michael Isikoff
“Both Rove and Bartlett have already received trial subpoenas from Libby’s defense lawyers, according to lawyers close to the case who asked not to be identified talking about sensitive matters. While that is no guarantee they will be called, the odds increased this week after Libby’s lawyer, Ted Wells, laid out a defense resting on the idea that his client, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, had been made a “scapegoat” to protect Rove. . .
… Rove is likely not eager to recount the story either. The reason? He would have to acknowledge that shortly after he had the chat with Libby, he went back to his office and had a phone conversation with Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper in which he also disclosed the fact that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA…”
Now, to me, the position that Rove is in here is the stuff that TV legal dramas are made of. Thus, I must ask whether his appearance implies any possibility of returning to the original case for which Libby is accused of obstructing.
This situation, to me, generates a notion that Rove, Bartlett, and Cheney may be cornered into giving testimony that implicates them and revitalizes the suspicion that there was in fact a deliberate conspiracy to seek revenge and marginalize Joe Wilson by outing his wife as a covert CIA operative.
Were I a television writer, I would conjure a scene in which Rove, after being forced to further reveal his (alleged) campaign to ‘get the word out’ on the Wilsons by both the defense and prosecutor, would be drawn into a climactic scene in which a cornered Rove either takes the Fifth Amendment or is indicted for conspiracy on his way out of the courtroom.
It is quite possible that I am a complete idiot. I remind you, however that I am an excellent illustrator and painter. Further, I am quite skilled at catching trout and making my wife laugh. Whether or not I am completely off on this chunk of hypothetical cheese that has been rattling around in my otherwise puny brain, I thought I’d post this diary in the hopes of getting a little better understanding than I currently own from some of you ‘experts’ out there.
Even if my theory is totally off, it’s a nice little fantasy, ‘aint it?
THX!
UPDATE: I edited out a redundant statement in the second to last paragraph.
:::::