Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Lawrence O'Donnell: Rove’s Lawyer an on-the-Record Liar

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 04:44 PM
Original message
Lawrence O'Donnell: Rove’s Lawyer an on-the-Record Liar
At Arianna’s HuffPo party last month, Mickey Kaus was surprised when I told him I did not think Bob Luskin was a liar. In several posts here, I’ve had my fun with Luskin’s endless media spinning on behalf of his most famous client, Karl Rove, but I have never said he is a liar.

That was then.

Rove’s lawyer is now an on-the-record liar. The proof: Luskin told the Washington Post the other day that if Rove escapes indictment, it won’t be “the product of my particular skill or cleverness.” Whenever prominent Washingtonians resort to humility in print, they are lying at minimum about their state of mind. Luskin’s lie runs deeper than that. The truth is Rove is not yet indicted exclusively because of his lawyer’s “particular skill.”

The Washington Post profile that provoked Luskin’s one-and-only public lie stresses how good Luskin is at both the legal complexities of criminal defense work and the much simpler but time-consuming task of spinning/using the Washington press corps. If Luskin wasn’t brilliant at both of those things, Rove would be indicted now. Luskin’s use of Viveca Novak in his last minute meeting with Patrick Fitzgerald as the first grand jury’s term was expiring is what left Fitzgerald with only one name to indict.

<clip>

More at the link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/roves-lawyer-an-onthe_b_11871.html


Will be interesting to observe the response(s) to this O'Donnell gem ....


Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
hiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. sure will
be interesting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Jane Hamsher: "DC Love Match: Unka Karl and Gold Bars Luskin"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. This Clears Rove
He will walk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. "For Karl Rove to be able to recant his early testimony before the grand
... jury where he stated he did not remember his conversation with Matt Cooper, he has to be able to prove that he did not come forward because of the likelihood that his lie would be exposed.

I want to underscore this because it is critical and I think sometimes I take it for granted that people understand this. Vivac either did or did not tip off Luskin to the fact that his client was Matt Cooper's source, and it really doesn't matter whether his client had been forthcoming with him or not. The piece of information Luskin gleaned from this conversation is that Matt Cooper was not the only one who knew this, the story was in circulation and even if Cooper was successful in his bid to invoke journalistic privilege the story might out anyway. No matter what happens, O'Donnell is right. Vivac gave her good friend Luskin -- and I'm told they are very good friends -- extremely valuable information.

<clip>

I think Fitzgerald is perfectly happy to run around on Luskin's goat ropes because it gives him an excellent look into Rover's defense, and he can shape his indictment accordingly. If Luskin was so confident that this particular defense was exculpatory I think he would've offered it up long before the final days before Libby was indicted.

Much more at the link:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_firedoglake_archive.html#113400079005515068


So, at least one other person, thinks the way I do.


Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quixote1818 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. If you were on the jury you would buy this????
No, I think Fitzgerald is just covering his ass with this. It's still very clear to me that Rove lied. I don't think this will fly with the jury.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
4. Waiting for Fitzgerald's next move
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
6. Kick. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC