Just how close did Karl Rove come to being indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald? Surprisingly close.
The AP reported that several interesting documents related to the Plame leak investigation were unsealed late on Friday, and among the revelations are insights on Fitzgerald targeting Rove. As one judge wrote, “Regarding [Time reporter Matthew] Cooper, the special counsel has demonstrated that his testimony is essential to charging decisions regarding White House adviser Karl Rove.”
Jeralyn Merritt notes that the unredacted materials highlight just how close Rove was to a criminal charge.
[O]n page 39: “Thus, given the compelling showing of need and exhaustion, plus the sharply tilted balance between harm and news value, the special counsel may overcome the reporters’ qualified privilege, even if his only purpose — at least at this stage of his investigation — is to shore up perjury charges against leading suspects such as Libby and Rove.”
The unredaction there is the last two words: “and Rove.”
And yet, while we were learning about Rove just barely skating by on an indictment, we were also learning that Rove’s security clearance at the White House has been renewed.
Should White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove be privy to the nation’s most sensitive secrets? Did he break trust with President Bush and the nation when he told syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak about Valerie Plame’s classified job with the CIA? Did he further erode that trust in 2003 when he told then-White House press secretary Scott McClellan that, as McClellan put it, there was “no truth” to rumors that he played a role in the disclosure of Plame’s identity?
Rove, of course, was investigated by special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald in the CIA leak case but was never charged. His security clearance was renewed after a reinvestigation in late 2006, which has puzzled Rep . Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
In a letter sent last week to White House Counsel Fred F. Fielding, Waxman alleged that Rove’s actions amounted to a violation of presidential guidelines that say “deliberate or negligent disclosure” of classified information can disqualify a staffer from future access to such material. Also being less than forthcoming, even about unintentional breaches, can be cause for revoking a security clearance.
“Under these standards, it is hard to see how Mr. Rove would qualify for renewal of his security clearance,” Waxman wrote.
Remember when Bush vowed to fire anyone in his White House involved with leaking classified information? In Rove’s case, the president not only broke his word and kept Rove in his powerful role, but the White House didn’t even revoke Rove’s security clearance.
Raise your hand if you’re surprised.