Why wasn't Rove indicted for Obstruction and Perjury?

[leveymg]

Almost exactly a year ago, it looked lIke Rove was about to be indicted by Fitzgerald after the U.S. Attorney discovered the existence of an email Rove had sent to then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley after Rove spoke with TIME Magazine's Matt Cooper on July 11, 2003.

Rove did not disclose the existence of the email to Hadley during his first two appearances before the grand jury. Rove had falsely testified that he first heard about Valerie Plame after her identity was disclosed in several news stories. That story was, of course, a complete lie, as Fitz discovered.

"I didn't take the bait," Rove wrote in the email to Hadley immediately following he got off the phone with Cooper. "Matt Cooper called to give me a heads-up that he's got a welfare reform story coming. When he finished his brief heads-up he immediately launched into Niger. Isn't this damaging? Hasn't the president been hurt? I didn't take the bait, but I said if I were him I wouldn't get Time far out in front on this." See, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove#Rove.27s_email_t...

How did Fitzgerald learn about that e-mail, and how did Rove retrieve it? Hadley, who was also interviewed by the Plame Grand Jury, might have revealed it and, possibly, produced a copy. Or, else, some other source led Fitz to learn about the message, and Rove may have been forced to belatedly produce a copy from his own records. Finally, perhaps it was "recalled" by Rove after two prior Grand Jury sessions, and was also "overlooked" by the prosecution staff and, aided by Rove, they went back into the e-mails and were finally able to locate it. This latter story, I recall, spread by the MSM, is most unbelievable.

***

Rove was the initial focus of the investigation, and lied to the Grand Jury twice, but was let off by Fitzgerald. Why?

On 13 August 2005 journalist Murray Waas reported that Justice Department and FBI officials had recommended appointing a special prosecutor to the case because they felt that Rove had not been truthful in early interviews, withholding from FBI investigators his conversation with Cooper about Plame and maintaining that he had first learned of Plame's CIA identity from a journalist whose name Rove could not recall.<39>

Following the revelations in the Libby indictment, sixteen former CIA and military intelligence officials urged President Bush to suspend Karl Rove's security clearance for his part in outing CIA officer Valerie Plame.<40> Ibid.

On June 13, 2006, Rove's attorney announced that he had received a letter from from Fitz informing him Karl would not be indicted. The public was forced to drawn our own conclusions about what the prosecution's reasoning was. Many hoped that Rove had cut a deal and delivered the goods against one or more White House figures. But, after Libby was convicted, Fitzgerald indicated that that he didn't intend to pursue others.

After learning that Rove was intimately involved in the decisions to improperly dismiss U.S. Attorneys, and that five million White House e-mails were "lost", questions about why Rove wasn't indicted for withholding his e-mail in the Plame case arise again.

Why wasn't Rove indicted for Obstruction in withholding his e-mail from investigators, and perjury for lieing about this to the Grand Jury? Why haven't there been additional indictments, and will justice be served?