tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post115023079394658012..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1150247358242715672006-06-13T20:09:00.000-05:002006-06-13T20:09:00.000-05:00Doug--you're correct about that. He made himself a witness to the proceeding by having lunch with a friend/reporter for Time who told him that Matt Cooper had a recollection that was different from Rove's as far as how he found out about Valerie Plame. Rove had originally denied talking to Cooper about it, then he revised his story substantially during subsequent grand jury appearances after Luskin spoke to the friend/reporter. Cooper's colleague, in effect, gave that big gift to Luskin to help save his client.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1150246863647949042006-06-13T20:01:00.000-05:002006-06-13T20:01:00.000-05:00I can't recall specifics at the moment, but it seems that when Luskin first got involved with this case, he shot his mouth off in ways that ended up looking stupid -- or at least in ways that indicated he was disingenuous. So, if Luskin wasn't being entirely truthful this time, I wouldn't be shocked. With Luskin's statement that Rove is completely off the hook, I'd guess that Rove's chances of indictment are down to about 30% or so.Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16655747495179504729noreply@blogger.com