I'm fascinated by this story
More Rove-y stuff at TalkLeft. Hard to understand what the long-term strategy is of whoever is lying in this case. If Rove has been indicted we will eventually know about it. Why deny so forcefully? If he hasn't, who-close to the investigation-would benefit from floating a story saying he has? All I can think is that Rove would desperately want to retain his seat of power within the administration and clearly can't do that once he's been indicted. Doing everything he can to get it rescinded, claim every technicality to hold on to the position that he has not actually yet been indicted? Or just wants to control when the story gets out there? None of it makes any sense to me. But then, what does these days?