My theory as to why the Bush administration refuses to comment

[JDPriestly]

on Rove. They realize that Rove, Libby, et al. will probably be indicted and that the evidence against them is tremendous. They anticipate convictions so they are trying to dirty the jury pool. Plamegate will have been so prominently discussed in the press that Rove, et al. will be able to claim they couldn't get a fair trial because they were tried and convicted in the press. This is a pretty weak defense/offense and unlikely to work, but it might give right-wing appellate courts a seemingly rational ground to make life very difficult for the prosecutors. In a sense, the Bush administration is fanning the fires on this story and secretly releasing evidence (where else do you think all these interesting details like the memo are coming from?) in order to ensure their defense later on. That is why we have to keep tying this in to the DSMs and lies leading to Iraq themes. We need to impeach Bush and Cheney, not just indictments for Rove, et al.

Most of all, we need to make sure that the Senate and House don't start granting immunity to the Rove, Libby, et al. crowd. Remember Iran-Contra. We don't want these traitors to get off or to work in future administrations.

Oh! And why Bush is pretending to be so silent on this. The Bush administration, and Rove, et al. want to be able to claim that they had nothing to do with and did not cause the publicity. They totally respected the ongoing investigation and refused to comment. Of course, that is a lie, and of course it isn't the only reason for their silence, but it is an important one.

[opihimoimoi]

1. Thats some food for thought....hmmmm, might just be the case.... hmmmmm

[Imagevision]

2. BUSH: it's always better to await the outcome of entire events

before figuring out a stance to take. Fitzgerald believes indictments involving other individuals besides Rove citing obstruction of justice and perjury.

[Supersedeas]

3. the focus on the connection to Iraq can not be over-emphasized

[Auntie Bush]

4. They know if bush talks , he's guaranteed to put his foot in his mouth.

He's been forbidden to talk by the real president. Bush is just a second rate actor.

Everything bush/Rove/Scott say can be used against them. Lying for example. How could they possibly say they are innocent without lying?
Their only option is to lie or admit guilt.

[mmonk]

5. Yes, and as far as

any immunity, it must be pre-emptively rejected somehow.