What about investigating you since you know what happened











--
U.S.A.F. VET.
3rd LES CAB, PI
"Tuttle's Almanac" <Harry.Tuttle@brazil.plumbing.gov> wrote in message
news:11fnqqenrucc270@corp.supernews.com...

What Exactly Did Rove Tell the President?
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBKTMOJ9CE.html

WASHINGTON (AP) - Among the many questions surrounding
the investigation into who in the Bush administration
leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer is whether
President Bush's top political adviser told his boss
the truth about his connection to the case.

Two years ago, the White House denied that Karl Rove
played any role, but revelations in the past month
have shown that Rove spoke with two journalists about
the operative, Valerie Plame. Whether Bush knew the
truth while the White House was issuing its denials
is not publicly known.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan was so adamant
in his denials in September 2003 that he told reporters
the president knew that Rove wasn't involved in the leak.

"How does he know that?" a reporter asked, referring to the president.

"I'm not going to get into conversations that the president
has with advisers or staff," McClellan replied.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald questioned Bush a
year ago and the prosecutor's office has questioned Rove
repeatedly, so presumably investigators know the answer
to what, if anything, Rove told Bush.

Whether Rove shaded the truth with Bush two years ago
is a potential political problem. The president so far
has stood by Rove's side, even raising the bar for
dismissing subordinates. Two years ago, Bush pledged
to fire any leakers, but now he says he would fire anyone
who committed a crime.

If Rove didn't tell Bush the truth, that theoretically
could be a legal problem for the presidential aide
under the federal false statement statute.

Wayne State University law professor Peter Henning said
the false statement law covers statements made to all
members of the executive branch, including the president
acting in his official capacity. In contrast, a typical
false statement case involves lying to investigators or
writing false information on a form to the government.

The difficulties in bringing even a typical false statement
case are considerable. Simply misleading someone isn't
enough to bring a prosecution.

"If the president asks Rove, 'Do we have anything to worry
about here?' and Rove says 'No,' that would not be a
false statement," said Henning. "These two men have
known each other a long time, the president is not going
to question Rove closely as a law enforcement agent
would, and that makes all the difference."

Henning is a former federal prosecutor in the Justice Department's
fraud section in Washington and has written a law school
textbook on white-collar crime.

What is clear about Rove is that after the White House's
public denials in 2003 saying Rove wasn't involved in the
leak, the presidential aide told investigators behind
closed doors about his conversations regarding Plame.

Asked whether it wants to retract its earlier denials,
the White House refuses to comment on the grounds that
the criminal investigation is ongoing.

Lewis Libby, Vice President ***** Cheney's chief of staff,
and apparently at least one other government official were
involved in leaking information to reporters about Plame,
the wife of Bush administration critic and former
U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson.

Presidential scholars say a White House's refusal to comment
can suggest an administration in political trouble.

"When under fire they suddenly hide behind the shield of
secrecy as though they have no control over the matter,"
said Mark J. Rozell, a public policy professor at
George Mason University who has written five books on
the presidency.

"What we really don't know factually is whether Rove lied
to the president or whether the president knew something
about Rove's role and dissembled," said Rozell.

The White House decision not to answer the question makes
sense from the standpoint of political damage control,
says Steve Hess, senior fellow emeritus at the Brookings Institution.

The CIA leak story "has very little traction on Main Street,"
but all that would change, Hess said, if someone is indicted
in Fitzgerald's criminal investigation.

The federal grand jury investigating the leak expires in October.