Rove Set To Testify

(Updated to add this wonderful timeline of Rove’s life, via the Village Voice.)

Well, well, well. Color me satisfied.

Last week I, along with many others, had lots of questions about Judith Miller’s sudden departure from prison (without, apparently, letting her bosses know first so they could avoid getting scooped.)

And the next day, statements by her and her bosses seemed to answer those questions with more questions, as I wrote about here.

Now comes the news that Karl Rove is going to testify in the case.

Again.

I, for one, take personal satisfaction over this news because one common annoying refrain from conservative Bush and Rove apologists last week was that it showed that Rove, not Libby Lewis, was the one Miller was protecting.

This seemed to ignore the fact that Matthew Cooper of Time required a personal waiver from Karl Rove before he testified about their related conversations, as was reported here.

So maybe this will shut up those Republicans for now.

It is one thing for The New York Times editorial page to have egg on its face for protecting crazy Miller, as Slate rightly points out. It is quite another for Rove, aka Bush’s Brain, to become more involved in this trial. And when you consider the fact that the law possibly broken – revealing the identity of a covert spy – was drafted by Bush’ own daddy, well, then I think this becomes hilarious.

Or scary and sad. Your reaction depends on your perspective and political persuasion. My reaction is to smile and wonder if that means Bush will finally get rid of Rove.

But I doubt it.

Besides, who else can leak such juicy information to terrible “journalists” like Robert Novak and Judith Miller, as well as decent ones like Cooper? Novak and Miller still have lots of questions to answer, such as I spelled out here.

I think my satire piece about a Bush press conference is becoming more realistic every day.

But truth is once again proving stranger than fiction.

And before anyone says Rove is innocent until proven guilty, let me remind them that Rove and Bush have never seemed hamstrung by this concept when dealing with their enemies, be they political opponents, potential terrorist suspects held in G. Bay or whoever.

Does that make it right for me take glee in this legal thorn in the side of Bush and Rove? No.

Do I feel guilty? Not really. Couldn’t happen to a more appropriate person.

If you don’t believe me, rent Bush’s Brain or Control Room for reminders of how Bush, Rove and others like to disregard truth when it gets in the way of their stories.

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t presume people innocent. But maybe Bush aides should have thought of that before they leaked Plame’s name in the first place.

Ed/Pub:LisaM