Reply #5: Okay, is "the lawyer" still Rove's? [View All]

[aquart]

This would be his take solely based on witnesses called, or what? I'm asking because I do NOT believe Fitzgerald's team is leaking. And Luskin (is that the name of Rove's lawyer?) wouldn't know anything that actually happened inside the jury room and Rove hasn't been called back, has he? So he wouldn't have new information, would he?

When I served on a grand jury, the DAs told us that we would be reading all sorts of inaccurate stuff in the newspapers but we weren't allowed to tell anyone the stuff wasn't true. It had to be enough that WE knew the truth. I read article after article in the NYT and Forbes that had pieces of information but they didn't put it together right. They really had NO idea what we were doing or the scope of it. Our jury actually changed its name as to the subject of the investigation and the media had absolutely no clue.

IF the jury has veered to perjury, it could simply be as one of the accumulated charges that will be presented for vote, but it could also be something that would be voted on separately, to bring an indictment to squeeze people into speaking more freely, yes? (Someone with actual legal knowledge would be useful here.) My jury hunted down a lot of little fish and then turned the stunned sweeties into canaries to hunt shark.

NO ONE has any idea what that jury is doing except Fitzgerald's team and the jury.