| |
| Think at your own risk. |
| Sunday, July 03, 2005 |
| Conversations with Karl |
Update July 4: Lawrence O'Donnell blasts Karl Rove on the question of "knowing" disclosure... This is either a case of O'Donnell defending his scoop, or a reporter who knows he has his man.
Orignal Post: Newsweek has gone to print with it's Karl Rove article, which confirms the conversations between Rove and Time reporter Matthew Cooper but clears up little else. And here's an exerpt from Lawrence O'Donnell's reaction:
On Friday, I broke the story that the e-mails that Time turned over to the prosecutor that day reveal that Karl Rove is the source Matt Cooper is protecting. That provoked Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin, to interrupt his holiday weekend to do a little defense work with Newsweek and the Los Angeles Times. On Saturday, Luskin decided to reveal that Rove did have at least one conversation with Cooper, but Luskin told the Times he would not “characterize the substance of the conversation.”
Luskin claimed that the prosecutor “asked us not to talk about what Karl has had to say.” This is highly unlikely. ... If what I have reported is not true, if Karl Rove is not Matt Cooper’s source, Rove could prove that instantly by telling us what he told the grand jury. Nothing prevents him from doing that, except a good lawyer who is trying to keep him out of jail.
Previous post: And the leaker is... |
posted by JReid @ 10:14 PM   |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
