The Note: Walking and Chewing Gum

— -- WASHINGTON, July 22

NEWS SUMMARY
Those of you who can't process two giant political stories at one time, please put down The Note right now and go off and enjoy your weekend.

For the rest of you who possess the multi-tasking skills of, say, a Mitch Bainwol:

1. Your first stop needs to be Dick Keil's blockbuster Bloomberg piece leading with the Notion that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby "have given accounts to a special prosecutor about how reporters first told them the identity of a CIA agent that are at odds with what the reporters have said, according to people familiar with the case." LINK

The story goes on to say:

"...Libby...told special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald that he first learned from NBC News reporter Tim Russert of the identity of Central Intelligence Agency operative Valerie Plame, the wife of former ambassador and Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, one person said. Russert has testified before a federal grand jury that he didn't tell Libby of Plame's identity, the person said."

And then:

". . .Rove told Fitzgerald that he first learned the identity of the CIA agent from syndicated columnist Robert Novak, according a person familiar with the matter. Novak, who was first to report Plame's name and connection to Wilson, has given a somewhat different version to the special prosecutor, the person said."

This is all key, because it is the first time that anyone has identified the alleged Russert/Libby conflict; the first time anyone has asserted that Novak has spilled to the special prosecutor (Note that it doesn't say "grand jury"); and the one of the first times that an alleged Novak/Rove split has been cited.

Then the story has Rove's lawyer making a cameo:

"Robert Luskin, Rove's attorney, said yesterday that Rove told the grand jury 'he had not heard her name before he heard it from Bob Novak.' He declined in an interview to comment on whether Novak's account of their conversation differed from Rove's."

O The questions the story raises:

X How the heck did Dick Keil suddenly get a grand jury source on this story? (This is about his fourth piece breaking news from the inside. . .)

X Has the White House figured out who Keil's source is?

X Assuming that Keil's source isn't Patrick Fitzgerald, has Fitzgerald figured out who Keil's source is?

X How does Fitzgerald feel about Mr. Luskin's continuing habit of speaking on the record about all this, in a very un-McClellan fashion?

2. Then read the New York Times' front-page, triple power byline (Johnston/Jehl/Stevenson) piece on how Rove and Libby allegedly worked together to deal with Wilson (duh). LINK

O The questions the story raises:

X Do the piece's sources, who are identified as talking "to demonstrate that Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby were not involved in an orchestrated scheme to discredit Mr. Wilson or disclose the undercover status of his wife, Valerie Wilson, but were intent on clarifying the use of intelligence in the president's address" feel it worked out the way they planned?

X Who was speaking on behalf of Ari Fleischer and Karl Rove for that story?

X Have White House officials compared Notes (through lawyers or otherwise) about what went on in those crucial days when the anti-Wilson effort was launched?

3. The Washington Post's Becker and Argetsinger cleverly plow through John Roberts' memos from his days at the Reagan White House counsel's office, and there are some interesting insights into the portrait of the lawyer as a (confident and pragmatic) young man. LINK

O The questions the story raises:

X Have other media organizations been the to Reagan Library yet (where the Post got the documents)? (The answer to that is: at least the New York Sun sort of has, and check out what the indomitable Josh Gerstein writes:

". . .(T)he Reagan Library. . . houses a veritable treasure trove of documents that Judge Roberts handled during his four-year stint at the White House."

"The Simi Valley, Calif., library lists hundreds of files prepared by Mr. Roberts on subjects ranging from the Abscam bribery scandal to humanitarian assistance to Nicaragua. About 4,200 pages of the files are available to the public, but the vast majority of his documents, numbering in the tens of thousands or more, are still awaiting processing."

"Senate Democrats have said they will ask for full access to the records, but an archivist said the nonpublic files will be released only upon the request of the Bush administration." LINK

X Did the liberal groups have all these documents? (We think we know the answer. . .)

X Did the White House vetters have all these documents (including the non-public ones)? (We think we know the answer. . .)

X Will ANY Roberts documents surface during this process that were unknown to the White House vetters?

4. Your final must-read piece is Charles Krauthammer's column, which says Roberts is a blank slate who Dr. K predicts will uphold Roe. LINK

O The questions the story raises:

X What separates conservatives who have doubts about Roberts from those who have been convinced otherwise?

X Is there anyone remaining on the conspiratorial left who doesn't see these few voices of dissent -- like Krauthammer -- as a White House ploy to create confusion and keep support on the right nearly rock solid while keeping the left off balance?

The grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA operative's name is scheduled to meet at the United States District Court in Washington, DC at 9:00 am ET. Who will the witnesses be, we ask?

At 10:00 am ET, the Senate Democratic Policy Committee and the House Government Reform Committee Minority hold a joint hearing to address the national security implications of disclosing a covert officer's identity. Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) and Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA) co-chair the hearing.

Also on the Hill at 10:00 am ET, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hear testimony from Karen Hughes in advance of her expected confirmation as the next Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy. We wonder how much time will be spent on the leak investigation.

Judge Roberts (with Fred Thompson in tow) plans to meet with Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) today. Having met with Sens. Schumer and Kennedy yesterday, the Durbin meeting will round out the three "no" votes Roberts received in the Judiciary Committee in 2003.

President Bush is in Atlanta today. At 11:20 am ET, he meets with seniors to promote his Medicare plan and at 11:55 am ET he holds a "conversation on Senior Security." The President will head to Camp David in the evening.

Meanwhile, Vice President Dick Cheney is scheduled to attend two fundraisers. First up is lunch fundraiser for GOP Senate candidate from Minnesota Rep. Mark Kennedy. Later tonight, the Vice President hits a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser for New Jersey gubernatorial candidate Doug Forrester at 6:30 pm ET in Princeton, NJ.

No roll call votes are planned in the Senate today as debate continues on the Defense Reauthorization bill.

Ken Mehlman travels to Miami today for a series of events aimed at boosting GOP support in minority communities. The RNC Chairman is expected to address the National Black Chamber of Commerce Conference, a group of Latino business leaders, and members of Miami's Haitian population.

The College Democrats of America kicks off its three-day National Convention at 8:00 am ET. Be sure to catch the opening address by Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) at 9:45 am ET, remarks by DNC Chairman Howard Dean at 12:15 pm ET and an appearance by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) at 6:30 pm ET.

The Democratic Leadership Council, a home to moderate/centrist Democrats that helped serve as a platform for Bill Clinton's presidential run, will convene its annual "national conversation" tomorrow in the battleground within the battleground that is Columbus, OH.

Four of the five featured key speakers are considering making a run for their party's presidential nomination in 2008. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN), Gov. Tom Vilsack (D-IA), Gov. Mark Warner (D-VA), and Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) are all scheduled to address the gathering.

The AFL-CIO conference officially begins on Monday, with a 10:00 am ET. If no compromise is reached over the weekend, it won't be a tough call for C2W unions to get out of town.

Major speakers on Monday include: AFL-CIO Pres. John Sweeney, Sen. Barack Obama, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Former U.S. Senator John Edwards, Julian Bond, Sen. Ted Kennedy, and Sen. Harry Reid. On Tuesday, highlights include Jesse Jackson and debate on a Sweeney-backed organizing resolution. The re-election of Sweeney occurs on Thursday from 8:00 am ET to 10:00 am ET.

On Sunday, the President and the First Lady attend the White House Tee Ball Game on the South Lawn at 4:00 pm ET.

You won't want to miss "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" on Sunday when Sen. John "Gang of 14" McCain (R-AZ) and the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), will each share their thoughts with George on the John Roberts nomination and a look ahead at the hearings to come. Then a powerhouse of roundtable including David Gergen, EJ Dionne, and ABC's Linda Douglass will all weigh-in on the battle to replace O'Connor. Check your local listings.

The Plame leak investigation:
The New York Times Johnston, Jehl, and Stevenson (with a Kornblut assist) have their story and it makes one wonder: LINK

Put yourself in Prosecutor Fitzgerald's shoes. And then ask: what about all the finger pointing at Ari Fleischer of late? (Note a personal familiar with this testimony says he told the grand jury that he has never seen the "S" memo.) Might it not strain credulity a bit to think that Ari was freelancing and going after Wilson in some uncoordinated way? If nothing else, this story makes it quite clear that Rove and Libby were intimately involved in damage control as it related to the Iraq/Africa story. Again, whether any laws were broken is an entirely different matter. But we're not sure those who wanted to demonstrate that Rove and Libby were not involved in an attempt to discredit Wilson did so successfully here.

The Wall Street Journal's "Washington Wire" kicks off thusly: "Roberts's Reception leads U.S. Democrats to renew focus on Rove."

"Party strategists conclude Bush's court pick may be unstoppable, and look to maintain earlier momentum from CIA leak case and other issues. Barring an unexpected revelation about the judge's background, 'Our strategy now is to essentially let Roberts go...then get back on Rove, Social Security and the Iraq war,' says a senior Congressional aide."

"Democrats plan to grill Bush confidant Karen Hughes about leak-case in her confirmation hearing for State Department public diplomacy post."

The Washington Post's tough Peter Slevin gets an on-the-record interview with Patrick J. Fitzgerald -- and/but it is about Mayor Daley!!! LINK

Al Kamen of the Washington Post's "In the Loop" column (the very model for The Note, in some ways) reminds the world what Ms. Hughes wrote in her book about the Wilson matter, but passes up the chance to theorize that it was meant as a secret (time-release) shot at a certain former colleague. LINK

Roberts: how will he rule?:
The Boston Globe's Scot Lehigh delivers one of the smartest columns we've seen since the President announced his nomination, suggesting that at this stage of the game Roberts appears to be the kind of guy that conservatives and liberals can both live with. LINK

Here are Lehigh's absolute must-read graphs on the abortion debate:

"Roberts's record certainly leaves a great deal of ambiguity about where he is on abortion, and it's undeniably part of the Senate's job to probe his judicial philosophy. Still, it's also all but preordained that Roberts won't answer with the clarity Democrats desire."

"Consider: It's not remotely realistic to expect a prolife president to nominate an aspiring justice who would declare himself firmly in support of Roe. It's only slightly less likely that such a nominee would say he sees no privacy right in the Constitution or that he would vote to overturn Roe."

"A much more probable response is that he won't prejudge the issue or that he doesn't deem it proper to say where he is, or might be, on matters that may soon be before the court."

"That won't prove satisfying for those who support abortion rights. And yet, it's probably the best answer Democrats can realistically hope for."

The New York Times' Liptak combed through Roberts' 49 published opinions since taking his seat on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and found a judicial philosophy rooted in restraint. LINK

Query: Exactly how many times did Judge Roberts use the word "modesty" in private sessions with Senators this week?

And although the New York Times' David Kirkpatrick provides the year- (at least) long strategy to get the influential religious conservative leaders and groups on board with the President's nominee, we continue to wonder what exactly these folks have learned that convince them that he's no Souter. LINK

Civil rights groups are expressing concern at blacked-out memos that only show parts of John Roberts' judicial opinion and pieces on minority voting rights during the Reagan administration. LINK

David Savage of the Los Angeles Times looks at some of the cases Roberts will immediately face if he is confirmed. LINK

"The Chamber of Commerce is expected to formally endorse Roberts soon, and the board of the National Assn. of Manufacturers, which has indicated it will put resources into a confirmation fight if necessary, met on the issue Thursday," reports the Los Angeles Times' Weinstein. LINK

Roberts: making the rounds:
Chairman Specter called Roberts' use of the words "modesty" and "stability," "highly significant." Sheryl Gay Stolberg's New York Times news-of-day also includes a great little detail about Fred Thompson not being invited into Roberts' meeting with Sen. Kennedy. LINK

The Wall Street Journal's Jeanne Cummings (and her headline writer) all but declares the nomination fight over and we'll say it again: the White House must just be laughing and shaking their collective head at the fact that the left is just NOW starting real research on Roberts' record.

Charles "Chuck" Babington of the Washington Post says Democrats might focus on commerce more than abortion (right) and that Roberts is off to a "powerful start," which Steve Schmidt would consider understatement. LINK

A filibuster looks unlikely at this point says some Gang of 14 members. Here's Maura Reynolds of the Los Angeles Times with details: LINK

USA Today's Kiely writes up Roberts' Thursday journey into the liberal lion's den. LINK

Roberts: the battle ahead:
The Los Angeles Times' Hook explores the relatively low-key Democratic response to Roberts thus far and suggests it "reflects a calculation that Democrats would have more to lose than to gain by quickly opposing a nomination that so far appears hard to beat. Such a move would probably fuel Republicans' efforts to portray Democrats as knee-jerk opponents of anything Bush wants." LINK

Hook points out that this approach could leave liberal interest groups geared up for major combat without much of a fight.

The Chicago Tribune's Mark Silva takes a sharp look at the Roberts rollout. LINK

"The administration aims to put potential critics on the defensive by requiring them to demonstrate that they are not simply promoting a political agenda," writes Silva.

Roberts: the family photo-op:
USA Today's Richard Benedetto gives the Roberts family pride a story unto itself. LINK

You're not in Chevy Chase anymore: Mrs. Roberts gets the Washington Post Style treatment from Hanna Rosin LINK, while Robin Givhan disses the kids' clothes. LINK

Justice O'Connor:
In her first formal public remarks since announcing her retirement, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor expressed concern about the current state of relations between the legislative and judicial branches of the federal government. Note, too, her polite retelling of the Riggins story. LINK

The politics of terror:
"If the recent attacks were meant to heighten public fear, the strategy isn't working: Americans are taking the London terrorist bombings in stride, with no increase in public concern about the threat of terrorism overall, or in terms of personal safety," write ABC News' Gary Langer and Jon Cohen.

"Seventy-three percent of Americans in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll say they're worried about the possibility of another major terrorist attack in the United States -- about the same as the average since October 2001. That includes 30 percent who are worried "a great deal" about another attack, also very near the average."

President Bush got his desired result on the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act in the House. Now on to the Senate and those competing Judiciary vs. Intelligence Committee versions. LINK

Random inspection of bags and packages before entering the New York City subway system begins today. LINK

The economy:
The Los Angeles Times' excellent primer on the news out of China: LINK

". . .the ambiguity of the Chinese announcement, in which it said it would uncouple the value of the yuan and the dollar, made it impossible for administration officials to say whether it amounted to a real change or a token gesture," writes Edmund Andrews of the New York Times. LINK

Bush agenda:
The Wall Street Journal's wirey John Harwood says: "Bush Returns to Social Security campaign trail."

"His Atlanta trip today comes as House Republican leaders plan September vote on plan to use temporary Social Security surpluses for private accounts, but not make program solvent. White House sees House plan as means to spark action."

"But key Republicans say the Senate can't pass a bill without long-term financial fix, and House passage isn't assured given AARP's opposition. 'It really doesn't help us fix the problem,' says Arizona Rep. Kolbe, who backs Bush's effort."

The Wall Street Journal also says: "Highway compromise may test Bush's veto threat." "House-Senate negotiators home in on spending total of $286.5 billion, or $2.5 billion more than Bush said he'd accept. But congressional Republicans on Hill predict the White House will go along, given their leaders' policy of not clearing bills the President won't accept."

2008: Democrats:
The Daily News' Ken Bazinet breathlessly says that Hillary Clinton's political future is extravagantly depended on her SCOTUS vote on Roberts, but then Jim Jordan restores reality and says it ain't all that big a deal. LINK

Working beneath his dignity and his talent, the Washington Post's Dana Milbank is forced to do the cliched "Hillary and Newt, sitting in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G" story, as Joe Gaylord and Howard Wolfson just laugh and laugh and laugh. LINK

Virginia Gov. Mark Warner is going to leave the state a surplus, no matter what Chris LaCivita says. LINK

2008: Republicans:
"Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has an unconventional plan for expanding health care coverage in his state: Cover everyone and make them pay for it," writes Bloomberg's Przybyla.

"The Republican governor submitted legislation yesterday that would require many of the state's 460,000 uninsured to get insurance and pay for a portion of the premiums with sliding subsidies based on income. Those who don't would face penalties."

Be sure to see Michael Dukakis' "ideas worth exploring" review.

The Boston Globe's account of Gov. Romney's ride on the Boston subway yesterday to reassure commuters of rail safety was terrifically humorous. Romney was harassed by a homeless man, cackled by an angry constituent, and he even forgot how much it costs to ride the T. LINK

Iowa:
The Des Moines Register reports that -- when it comes to eminent domain -- Iowa House Republicans are restrictionists. LINK

The Schwarzenegger Era:
"Delivering a substantial blow to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's 'year of reform' agenda, a judge Thursday struck from the special election ballot an initiative that would have wrested away the Legislature's power to draw political districts," writes Nancy Vogel of the Los Angeles Times. LINK

Note Schwarzenegger's campaign team urging the proposition's sponsor, Ted Costa, to appeal.

2006:
The New York Post's Fred Dicker says that a Pataki re-elect bid would be a disaster for Empire State taxpayers. LINK

2005:
"Naral's endorsement did seem to have one string attached: a strong statement by the mayor concerning President Bush's new Supreme Court nominee, Judge John G. Roberts," writes Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times on another big coup of an endorsement for Republican Michael Bloomberg. LINK

"Mr. Bloomberg did not go as far as the group did in criticizing Mr. Roberts, but he did say he would support him only if he gave 'a clear indication that he accepts Roe v. Wade as the law of the land.'"

The New York Times follows up on the Politicker's report on the resignation of a Miller staffer for sending an email to Council employees asking if they would like to volunteer their off-hours at the Speaker's mayoral campaign. LINK

We wonder if Fred Baldassaro has already called Sophie Milam to offer compassion and understanding on the dangers of sending unauthorized emails.

POTUS and FLOTUS make B1 of the Washington Post with their Thursday DC-area fundraisers -- he for the Old Dominion's Jerry W. Kilgore. LINK

Politics:
"After raising more than $140 million in the last election cycle, America Coming Together (ACT), the biggest liberal "527" group, is dramatically scaling back its operations as its leaders decide what role it can play in 2006 and beyond," write Roll Call's Bresnahan and Preston in their must-read story.

Here's a taste of Newt Gingrich on Newt Gingrich in Robert Draper's thoroughly entertaining piece in the August issue of GQ, hitting newsstands next week:

"I did a speech on bin Laden in 1996…. I've been paying attention to Iraq since I met with Cheney in September of 1990.… My first speech on personal accounts for Social Security was November of 1986.… I first talked about doing all of this in August of 1958. [All of what?] Saving civilization."

South Carolina's Governor Mark Sanford is losing his press secretary Will Folks, who is leaving his post to run his own political consulting business. Folks has been with Sanford from the beginning, but recently has become criticized for his jabbing of those disapproving of the Governor's politics. Sanford is up for reelection in 2006. LINK

House of Labor:
The New York Times' Greenhouse looks at the diverse backgrounds and experiences of the leaders of the dissident unions poised to bolt from the AFL-CIO. LINK

The Wall Street Journal's Gary Fields gets on B1 with his serviceable take on the looming AFL battle.

Steven Pearlstein of the Washington Post has the same story on D1. LINK

As does Bloomberg's Kim Chipman. LINK

Media:
Gwen Ifill's Washington Post appreciation of the late great Paul Duke is, naturally, a must read. LINK