Dr. Spin’s Lawyer On Subpoena In Siegelman Case: It’s All Dan Abrams’s Fault.

Thinkprogress:

Yesterday, MSNBC’s Dan Abrams reported that Rove will now only “talk about it with the committee, and only if no transcript is made, and if it’s not done under oath.” Furthermore, according to Abrams, Rove’s attorney Robert Luskin is “blaming us” for the subpoena threat because of an incriminating e-mail exchange that was taken “out of context.” As Luskin wrote to the Committee on April 29:

Your invitation is premised on reports that I had expressed Mr. Rove’s “willingness to testify before the committee.” The report in question was based on an e-mail exchange with a producer for a cable news network and was taken grossly out of context.

Yesterday, Abrams provided the exact e-mail exchange with Luskin. Luskin clearly said, “sure” to Rove testifying if subpoenaed:

From: Verdict with Dan Abrams
To: Robert Luskin
Sent: April 07, 2008 4:59 PM

Sorry. Let me be more clear. Will Karl Rove agree to testify if Congress issues a subpoena to him as part of an investigation into the Siegelman case?

From: Robert Luskin
To: Verdict with Dan Abrams
Sent: April 07, 2008 6:59 PM

Sure. Although it seems to me that the question is somewhat offensive. It assume he has: something to hide, even though — gov siegelman’s uncorroborated assertions aside — there’s literally no credible evidence whatsoever to substantiate his charges. I would hope that you’d get around to mentioning that fact.