A couple of observations on the ongoing Karl Rove weirdness. First, Justin over at TPM Muckraker has the following intriguing little gem:
Responding to news that Karl Rove's lawyers say they've been notified the Bush adviser won't get charged in the Plame leak investigation, Reader AB asks, "is it reasonable for them to publish the letter from Fitzgerald to prove that their statement says is, in fact, true[?]"
We thought it was a good question -- noting, however, that news reports conflict on whether Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, received a letter from Fitzgerald. Luskin himself stated he was "formally advised," but does not state how.
I called Luskin at his office and told him I was interested to know precisely how Fitzgerald had notified him of his decision. "I'm really not going to add anything to what's in the statement," Luskin told me.
In other words, Rove's lawyer appears to have absolutely no intention of making that letter public. But why not? One would think that, if you've just been exonerated, you'd be more than delighted to be waving the proof around under everyone's nose. So why the reluctance? Well, as other people have proposed, here's a guess.
If the hypothetical letter fully and unambiguously cleared Rove of all wrongdoing, well, sure, you'd be more than happy to announce it to the world. But if that letter said something like, "We have decided not to press charges with the understanding that, pursuant to our agreement, your client agrees to testify against Richard W. Cheney, as per our extensive discussions. Any deviation from this agreement will immediately nullify our arrangement and will result in immediate charges against Mr. Rove." Yeah, I can see you not wanting that to get out. Is it irresponsible to speculate? As Magic Dolphin lady once suggested, it is irresponsible not to. But that's not the best part.
As several Rove watchers have established, there is absolutely no doubt that Rove was part of the White House conspiracy to expose the identity of CIA covert operative Valerie Plame. That he did this is part of the public record, and the fact that Fitzgerald had decided (for whatever reason) not to charge Rove doesn't change that in the slightest.
And yet, from the wankersphere, you're seeing incredibly infantile chortling like, oh, this:
Fitzmas has been cancelled (again), idiots. Deal with it.
Translation: "Hey, boneheads. Karl Rove blew the cover of a secret agent, jeopardized national security, ruined a woman's career and he got away with it! Whoo hoo! Fuckin' A! Do we rock or what?"
The shallow end of the gene pool really can be an unpleasant place, can't it?