Okay, who is official A?

Rove was still under investigation. That's still [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102800153.html|the line in the press]:

Although no indictment was announced for Rove, 54, the White House deputy chief of staff, today's proceedings did not remove him from legal jeopardy. Sources close to the case said the investigation of Rove is continuing.

If Cheney's also involved, they'll probably want to get Rove first (to have more evidence to use against the higher-up).

If I had to bet on the outcome, it would be that any indictments won't go higher than Rove.

But we'll see.

[edit:] There's also this bit in a Washington Post [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/10/28/DI2005102800985.html|Q&A transcript]:

Amherst, Mass.: What do you make of the fact that numerous officials are identified in the indictment by their official positions (e.g. "Under Secretary of State), but "Official A" is treated differently?

Robert G. Kaiser: Good question, and I can't answer it authoritatively. I recall, but am not certain of this, that we have earlier reported that Libby and Karl Rove had a conversation of the kind described in the indictment that occurred between Libby and "Official A." I am trying to get Walter Pincus to clear this up for me right now, but he is busy. We know from Matt Cooper of Time that on the date of that conversation, July 14, 2003, he and Rove had a conversation about Plame.

We're trying to clear up which of two undersecretaries of state this could have been, Marc Grossman or John Bolton. (There are other undersecretaries, but they have narrow and specific areas of responsibility which, I believe, disqualify them as potential iterlocutors with Libby about the Wilsons. I could be wrong about this.)

Cheers,
Scott.

Post #231,372 by boxley 10/28/05 1:48:54 PM Reply	Okay, who is official A? "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #231,376 by Another Scott 10/28/05 2:12:25 PM Reply	Karl Rove is an obvious guess.
Post #231,379 by boxley 10/28/05 2:24:12 PM Reply	not really because then he would be charged as well for mishandling classified inteligence? Im thinking Cheney, and they dont want to take him down. thanx, bill "the reason people don't buy conspiracy theories is that they think conspiracy means everyone is on the same program. Thats not how it works. Everybody has a different program. They just all want the same guy dead. Socrates was a gadfly, but I bet he took time out to screw somebodies wife" Gus Vitelli Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 49 years. meep questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org]
Post #231,383 by Another Scott 10/28/05 3:02:26 PM 10/28/05 5:16:37 PM Reply	But the rumors this morning were that... Rove was still under investigation. That's still [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/28/AR2005102800153.html\|the line in the press]: Although no indictment was announced for Rove, 54, the White House deputy chief of staff, today's proceedings did not remove him from legal jeopardy. Sources close to the case said the investigation of Rove is continuing. If Cheney's also involved, they'll probably want to get Rove first (to have more evidence to use against the higher-up). If I had to bet on the outcome, it would be that any indictments won't go higher than Rove. But we'll see. [edit:] There's also this bit in a Washington Post [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/10/28/DI2005102800985.html\|Q&A transcript]: Amherst, Mass.: What do you make of the fact that numerous officials are identified in the indictment by their official positions (e.g. "Under Secretary of State), but "Official A" is treated differently? Robert G. Kaiser: Good question, and I can't answer it authoritatively. I recall, but am not certain of this, that we have earlier reported that Libby and Karl Rove had a conversation of the kind described in the indictment that occurred between Libby and "Official A." I am trying to get Walter Pincus to clear this up for me right now, but he is busy. We know from Matt Cooper of Time that on the date of that conversation, July 14, 2003, he and Rove had a conversation about Plame. We're trying to clear up which of two undersecretaries of state this could have been, Marc Grossman or John Bolton. (There are other undersecretaries, but they have narrow and specific areas of responsibility which, I believe, disqualify them as potential iterlocutors with Libby about the Wilsons. I could be wrong about this.) Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott Oct. 28, 2005, 05:16:37 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #231,411 by Ashton 10/28/05 5:22:37 PM Reply	We lazy folk Appreciate your nonpareil Google-fu!

Welcome to IWETHEY!