Wayne Madsen says that sources tell him the Rove indictment will be issued this Friday. He also claims that Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, is now a subject of the investigation, as well as speculating as to the possible reasons why Jason Leopold’s article last week was mistaken regarding the meeting at Patton Boggs and the 24 hour timeframe.
(Details below the fold, now with an UPDATE)
WMR can report tonight on more details concerning the confusing reports regarding Karl Rove and Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald from last Friday. WMR can confirm that the appearance of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Grand Jury at the US Federal Courthouse in Washington was a formality in which the jury informed the Attorney General of their decision to indict Karl Rove. That proceeding lasted for less than 30 minutes and took place shortly after noon. […]
According to sources within the Patton and Boggs law firm, Karl Rove was present at the law firm’s building on M Street. WMR was told by a credible source that a Patton and Boggs attorney confirmed that Fitzgerald paid a visit to the law firm to inform Rove attorney Robert Luskin and Rove that an indictment would be returned by the Grand Jury against Rove. Contrary to other reports, some of which may have emanated from the Rove camp in order to create diversions and smokescreens, the meetings at Patton and Boggs did not last 15 hours nor was a 24-hour notice of intent to indict delivered to Rove. […] Several sources have told WMR that an announcement concerning the indictment of Rove will be made on Friday, May 19 generally following the same scenario from October 28, 2005 — the posting of the indictment on the Special Prosecutor’s web site followed by a press conference at Main Justice. […]
WMR was also told by a credible source that part of the reason for Fitzgerald’s visit to Patton and Boggs was to inform Rove attorney Luskin that he has moved into the category of a “subject” of the special prosecutor’s investigation as a result of a conversation with Time reporter Viveca Novak, in which Novak told Luskin that Rove was a source for Time’s Matt Cooper. The special prosecutor, who has prosecuted one defense attorney in the Hollinger case, is reportedly investigating whether Luskin, as an officer of the court, may have violated laws on obstruction of justice.
So far I’ve found no major media reports confirming any elements of either the Leopold or Madsen stories. As always, we wait with bated breath for Fitzmas, or as I like to call it now, Fitzmorial Day. Keep your finger crossed.
Update [2006-5-18 10:51:15 by Steven D]: Capitol Hill Blue has this excerpt from a post at Democratic Underground where William River Pitt, Leopold’s editor at Truthout, continues to claim a Rove indictment is imminent:
Those who have stood with truthout are owed a massive river of thanks. Your faith will be rewarded.
Those who have expressed doubts, and await further confirmation, are totally above reproach. If I didn’t know what I know, if I was a DUer out of the fact loop truthout has been in, I’d be doing and saying exactly the same things. […]
truthout was right on Saturday, Sunday, Monday, yesterday and today. We will still be right tomorrow and Friday, no matter what the goddam unbelievable lapdog mainstream media has to say (or more to the point, doesn’t have to say) about it.
I understand your frustrations at the way this has played out; in fact, I call your frustration and raise it a billionfold. There are good reasons for this, and those reasons will be made clear when everything comes out. Those good reasons haven’t made the process easier.
Update [2006-5-18 11:52:15 by Steven D]: A brief response to the skeptics at Daily Kos..
I am a skeptic also. I posted no diaries or stories about the initial Jason Leopold story because it seemed a little too fantastical to me at the time, what with the 24 hour deadline, etc. And I am also skeptical of Madsen’s report. Like many of you I’m hopeful, but afraid of being burned again by promises of a Rove frogmarch that never seems to materialize.
However, Madsen is now the second internet reporter to make the claim that a Rove indictment is imminent, and he does support some of the elements of Leopold’s story. It should also be noted that both David Shuster and Chris Matthews of MsNBC have also made recent comments to the effect that they believed Rove would be indicted soon by Fitzgerald, Matthews in remarks made on the Imus show on May 12, , and Shuster on Countdown on May 7th.
For those reasons, I feel justified in reporting what Madsen has posted on his website. I make no opinion as to its accuracy, but I also feel to simply ignore the report’s existence would be wrong. Hopefully, we’ll get more details later today from other news sources with which we can better determine the validity of Madsen’s story that Rove is going to be indicted tomorrow, and that Luskin is now a subject of Fitzgerald’s investigation.
