um, has anyone SEEN this letter Luskin attributes?

is it online anywhere?

see here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2676523&mesg_id=2676523

n/t

According to Salon:

In a follow-up interview, we asked Corallo if he could provide us a copy of the letter -- and he says there was a letter -- that Luskin says he received from Fitzgerald. He declined to do so, saying it has been the Rove team's long-standing policy not to release written communication from the special prosecutor. He insisted, however, that the letter says nothing at all about Rove's continuing cooperation with Fitzgerald's investigation. "There is nothing, there are no conditions, there were no discussions of any conditions or deals or anything of the sort," Corallo said. He said that Fitzgerald's decision was based solely on "Mr. Fitzgerald's coming to the proper conclusion" about Rove's legal culpability, or lack thereof.

http://salon.com/politics/war_room/

Mark Corallo, press flack for Karl Rove, is not a great source

I'm all confused and have given up until I hear from Fitz.

We have to take his word for it.

:eyes:

edited to add: On his say so, we go bananas around here?

Ben, can someone pad my cell? ;)

We have a number of padding options available.

The default option, canvas and kapok is warranted for six months average use.

For just $200 more, though, you get our Deluxe model foam rubber padding and rayon covers, warranted for two years,

and for only $700 you get our Premiere padding with natural allergen-free milkweed rubber foam padding and a flax/hemp blended 600 count linen cover warranted for LIFE!

I'm a girl of modest means

Here's what I've collected and am trying to sort out:

3 different accounts of how Luskin was notified - letter, phone call and fax.

The story originated with Solomon, a GOP operative who has been known to fabricate in the past.

Luskin claims to have a letter, but refuses to allow anyone to see it.

Fitzgerald has "no comment".



:shrug:

Obviously Fitzgerald still has something going on, otherwise it would be officially "over" now.

That's not the case.

I'm curious as to who his real target is.

on liberal forums, starting multiple flame wars.

the letter states "unlikely to indict". If that wording is correct then it doesn't mean rove is off the hook. I'll bet there is a sealed indictment hanging over his head if he doesn't live up to his end of whatever deal he made with Fitz.
All this is is attorney PR. Luskin can say no indictment but I'm sure he isn't telling the whole story.

maybe not, lol. I've been dodging the slings and arrows too much to find the the 'thread of origin on all this'.

"Mr. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, said he would not comment on Mr. Rove's status".

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/washington/13cnd-leak.html?hp&ex=1150257600&en=e40da3e03155858f&ei=5094&partner=homepage


So, as I read it, this all hangs on what the press was told by Luskin. Period. No verification otherwise.

Why on earth does Luskin think that this will quell 'baseless speculation' about Rove's conduct. Of course everyone is now gonna say he turned. It's just a change of subject matter...people aren't going to beleive that Rove is again considered a 'stand-up guy' or whatever.