WSJ reporting Rove indictment is up in the air ....

[Zen Democrat]

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113042519536281308-8BXD7wkzhqhjPzIfa5fM31MWZdY_20061028.html?mod=blogs

With Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald poised to bring charges today against at least one Bush administration official in the CIA-leak investigation, White House officials were told the probe may not be over.

Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser and deputy White House chief of staff, was informed yesterday evening that he may not be charged today but remains in legal jeopardy, according to a person briefed on the matter. Mr. Fitzgerald, who meets with jurors this morning, has zeroed in on potential wrongdoing by I. Lewis Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, and is likely to charge Mr. Libby at least with making false statements. The testimony of reporters who have been witnesses in the case has contradicted Mr. Libby's public statements.

Mr. Fitzgerald appeared still to be pondering whether to charge Mr. Rove and has notified the political strategist that he remains under investigation.

* * *

[Zen Democrat]

1. and to add ...

I think this story, along with what's been in the WP and NYTimes, strongly indicates that Rove trying to tread water really doesn't have a clue if he's going to be indicted tomorrow or not.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Someone is leaking like a sieve.

Who? Lawyers.

Why? To create an atmosphere of uncertainty.

[Oilwellian]

3. Or...

it could be Fitz fucking with Rove, and fucking him good. :D

[Zen Democrat]

4. Well, at the very least, Fitzgerald knows who the leaker is.

And Fitzgerald's staff probably doesn't know what he's going to do tomorrow. But, I'll bet they have a contingency plan for every possible scenario.

[deadparrot]

5. This is all just speculation.

"Appeared," "may not," etc.

NO ONE KNOWS!

[Zen Democrat]

6. Isn't it delicious.

[deadparrot]

7. It is indeed.

I just wish people around here wouldn't take everything they read as gospel. :)

[AlCzervik]

8. Maybe he's pomdering what to charge him and not whether to charge him

[Catherine Vincent]

9. The WSJ can't be trusted.

[yellowcanine]

10. Exact;y. WSJ + 1 pound salt = maybe something resembling truth.

[Zen Democrat]

11. The WSJ reporters have been good. They aren't the editorial page.

The WSJ editorial page is the Fox News of daily newspapers.