Informed Speculation

The great Tom Maguire gets in on the act with a pretty-near definitive shoot-down of the Marc Ash “we were right, Rove was indicted” piece:

The TruthNot piece makes no sense, but let’s highlight this special nonsense:

The electronic communication from Fitzgerald to Luskin, coming immediately on the heels of our Monday morning, June 12 article “Sealed vs. Sealed” that became the basis for the mainstream media’s de facto exoneration of Karl Rove was, our sources told us, negotiated quickly over the phone later that afternoon.

Pretty good inside stuff, yes?  The phone rings, Luskin is on the line, and the TruthNot source is there!

But wait!  Who, other than Marc Ash, has forgotten their classic lead from the May 13 piece?

Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent more than half a day Friday at the offices of Patton Boggs, the law firm representing Karl Rove.

During the course of that meeting, Fitzgerald served attorneys for former Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove with an indictment charging the embattled White House official with perjury and lying to investigators related to his role in the CIA leak case, and instructed one of the attorneys to tell Rove that he has 24 business hours to get his affairs in order, high level sources with direct knowledge of the meeting said Saturday morning.

Robert Luskin, Rove’s attorney, did not return a call for comment. Sources said Fitzgerald was in Washington, DC, Friday and met with Luskin for about 15 hours to go over the charges against Rove…

How could sources who can tip TruthOut to a single phone call be wrong about a fifteen hour meeting?  Or does TruthOut still fantasize that such a meeting occurred?  Well, here is their current punchline:

Our sources continue to maintain that a grand jury has in fact returned an indictment. Our sources said that parts of the indictment were read to Karl Rove and his attorney on Friday, May 12, 2006.

Wow – they spent fifteen hours reading “parts of the indictment” to Karl Rove and his attorney?  That raises the bar on “tedium” to absurd heights – “Like watching paint dry” will never mean “boring” again.

Let’s close with this:

That leaves the most important question: If our sources maintain that a grand jury has returned an indictment – and we have pointed to a criminal case number that we are told corresponds to it – then how is it possible that Patrick Fitzgerald is reported to have said that ‘he does not anticipate seeking charges against Rove at this time?’ That is a very troubling question, and the truth is, we do not yet have a definitive answer.

They don’t have a definitive answer, but… the trial is not until next January, prosecutors aren’t normally in the business of announcing non-indictments, so Keep Hope Alive!

Yep – hope springs eternal when your worldview is built on conspiracy…