
The "Out to Lunch" DefenseKarl Rove's story doesn't make sense.
Posted Thursday, April 27, 2006, at 11:48 AM ETDownload John Dickerson's latest political podcast here, or sign up for Slate's free daily podcast on iTunes.
Karl Rove testified Wednesday for the fifth time before a federal grand jury about the alleged White House leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity to the press. In December, John Dickerson explored why Rove's previous testimony was chock full of holes: "Rove first testified before the grand jury in February 2004. In that first visit, he said nothing about talking to Time's Matt Cooper. He also didn't mention Cooper in an earlier interview with the FBI. Then, eight months later, in October 2004, Rove returned to the grand jury to alter his earlier account and volunteered that he had talked to Cooper."
What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum












Is It More Important for Your Turkey To Be Organic or Local?
Why Gift Cards Are a Terrible Gift
Is Sarah Palin's Approval Rating Really as High as Barack Obama's?
Justice Scalia's Most Eccentric Habits
Adam Lambert's Refreshing Non-Apology on the CBS Early Show
Democrats Have a Lot To Be Thankful For