Bob Woodward apologized today to the Washington Post and said he did not reveal his source until last month because he wanted to avoid being subpoenaed by Fitzgerald.

Woodward, an assistant managing editor and best-selling author, said he told Leonard Downie Jr. that he held back the information because he was worried about being subpoenaed by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special counsel in the case.

"I hunkered down. I'm in the habit of keeping secrets. I didn't want anything out there that was going to get me subpoenaed."

The Post is standing by Woodward. Others are far less charitable.

The Washington Post reports that reporter Bob Woodward was deposed by Patrick Fitzgerald on Monday for two hours. The big news is that Woodward was told by a "senior Administration official" about Joseph Wilson's wife working for the CIA as an analyst in weapons of mass destruction in mid-June, 2003.

My bet: Woodward's source is the State Department or CIA official mentioned in Paragraph 6 or 7 (and 33)of the Indictment against Libby. If it's the State Department official, it could be David Wurmser, John Hannah or Fred Fleitz. David Wurmser seems to me to be the most likely.

6. On or about June 11 or 12, 2003, the Under Secretary of State orally advised LIBBY in the White House that, in sum and substance, Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and that State Department personnel were saying that Wilson's wife was involved in the planning of his trip.

7. On or about June 11, 2003, LIBBY spoke with a senior officer of the CIA to ask about the origin and circumstances of Wilson's trip, and was advised by the CIA officer that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA and was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip.

[Note: This is another very long analysis intended for the seriously RoveGate afflicted. It is also speculation, based on publicly available information. Neither I nor TalkLeft have any sources connected to the investigation.]

There were three articles last week with new details about Karl Rove's status with Patrick Fitzgerald. I recommend reading all of them.

• Washington Post, Libby May Have Tried to Mask Cheney's Role
• The Wall Street Journal, As Time Passes in Leak Probe, Rove Is Seen as Less Vulnerable(subscriber only link)
• Murray Waas, Libby Testimony Is Key To Rove Inquiry

One thing that stands out immediately is the different information coming from Karl Rove's camp as to his status and, more particularly, when the outcome will be disclosed.

Notwithstanding last night's comeback at the Federalist Society dinner, Crooks and Liars points us to Murray Waas' new column indicating otherwise.

Murray always has the best sources. I'll have more to say later this afternoon after I've had a chance to parse it.

Bump and Update: Raw Story reports that this information, posted on TalkLeft yesterday, is accurate. RS says Fitz is wrapping up his probe and looking to charge Karl Rove with false statements to investigators and perjury. His aide, Susan Ralston, is said not to be in jeopardy, but has been called back to the grand jury, perhaps Monday.

*******
Original Post: 11/9

Susan Ralston is described as Rove's "right hand man." She is also a Filipino American and her involvement in the leaks probe has generated news coverage in the Phillipines. The Philippine News reports today that she will again "appear before Fitzgerald" concerning a telephone call between Matthew Cooper and Karl Rove on July 11, 2003.

Bump and Update: I can't believe I took the time to do this, but I did. At the end of the post you will find all of the same day appearances, times included, for 2002 for Joseph Wilson and Paul Vallely. [Source: Lexis.com] With the possible exception of one date, September 12, when they were on different segments of Studio B with Shepard Smith, they would not have been in the green room within hours of each together. And even that date is dubious unless Vallely arrived very early for his segment.

Update: Left Coaster has more.

****
Original Post (11/8)

Crooks and Liars has a roundup of blogger reaction to the right wing's attempt to smear Joseph Wilson by claiming he leaked his wife's identity in 2002 to Paul Vallely in the Green Room of Fox News. The smear tactic won't work.

Slate's Mickey Kaus today has an interesting theory on what Lewis Libby told Tim Russert.

kf hears, through trustworthy and knowledgeable sources, that in his conversation with Russert Libby gave vent to the archetypal (and wrongheaded) charge that Matthews was animated by anti-Semitism--presumably because Matthews talked a lot about "neoconservative" Bush aides and war supporters and interviewed guests (such as Pat Caddell) who did too.

Kaus proffers that NBC wants to keep this quiet, thus it has not confirmed that Libby's call to Russert was prompted by this Hardball Show and comments by Chris Matthews.

Raw Story reports that Patrick Fitzgerald is considering whether to bring a false statements charge againt Karl Rove for lying to investigators in pre-grand jury interviews and a perjury charge for lying to the grand jury.

Rove did not tell FBI investigators in 2003 that he had spoken with Novak prior to his column being published and had been one of the two “senior administration officials” cited in Novak’s column as having confirmed Plame’s identity and CIA employment.

....Meanwhile, Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, is laboring to convince Fitzgerald that any information related to Plame’s outing that Rove may have not been forthcoming about was the result of an innocent bout of forgetfulness on the part of his client. Luskin has spoken to Fitzgerald at least once over the phone about Rove’s legal position since Libby’s indictment, the attorneys said.

[Note: Only for the seriously RoveGate-afflicted. This may be my longest parsing yet.]

Karl Rove's lawyers are talking again. Here's their latest, from Saturday's New York Times:

Lawyers involved in the case say the prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, has narrowed the investigation of Mr. Rove to whether he tried to conceal from the grand jury a conversation he had with a Time magazine reporter, Matthew Cooper, in the week before the identity of an undercover intelligence operative was made public in 2003.

In what is believed to be his final look at any involvement by Mr. Rove, Mr. Fitzgerald has centered on whether he was fully forthcoming about the belated discovery of an internal e-mail message that confirmed his conversation with Mr. Cooper, to whom Mr. Rove had mentioned the C.I.A. officer. Lawyers in the case say Mr. Rove had learned the officer's identity from the columnist Robert D. Novak two days before speaking to Mr. Cooper.

There has been a lot of speculation about why Fitzgerald met with President Bush's private lawyer, James Sharp, just before the Indictment against Lewis Libby was returned. I thought it was to give the President a heads-up on the results of the investigation and let him know only Libby was going to be indicted.

The New York Times today reports "discussions" between Sharp and Fitz regarding Rove. It doesn't say when they took place, but it seems to fit that it would have been that last meeting.

Mr. Fitzgerald no longer seems to be actively examining some of the more incendiary questions involving Mr. Rove. At one point, he explored whether Mr. Rove misrepresented his role in the leak case to President Bush - an issue that led to discussions between Mr. Fitzgerald and James E. Sharp, a lawyer for Mr. Bush, an associate of Mr. Rove said.

[hat tip Patriot Daily.]

Via Ryan Lizza at TNR's The Plank:

I just got a call from Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn. He confirmed that The Washington Post, The New York Times, and other news organizations this morning are in fact wrong. The "principal deputy" to Libby named in the indictment is Edelman, not Hannah. Here's exactly what Samborn said:

You're correct, it's Edelman. I can't account for why the other papers are saying it's Hannah, but it's not. It is Eric Edelman. You heard me correctly on Friday when I said that.

The New York Times now reports that Edelman is the "principal deputy" and he didn't disclose his knowledge to Congress this past spring. Bush used a recess appointment to put Edelman in his current position.

The Washington Post reports White House aides are debating whether Karl Rove should resign and that Rove is not out of Fitzgerald's cross-hairs.

Fitzgerald is considering charging Rove with making false statements in the course of the 22-month probe, and sources close to Rove -- who holds the titles of senior adviser and White House deputy chief of staff -- said they expect to know within weeks whether the most powerful aide in the White House will be accused of a crime.

Jonathan Alter at Newsweek writes that Rove's security clearance is in jeopardy. Jane at Firedoglake provides a perceptive analysis of these developments, including this quote about the use of the term "Official A" from the WAPO article: