That seems to be a central preoccupation in the wake of the leak investigation that has already led to the indictment and resignation of Scooter Libby. Karl Rove, who is mentioned in the indictment itself as “official A,” is still under investigation by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, and while he may well survive unscathed, he may yet have to vacate his White House office.
At this point, no one really knows. Except, of course, for the seers at Time and Newsweek.
Mike Allen at Time leads off his Rove story by delving not just into the unknown future, but into the Boy Genius’ mind: “He’s weary. His wife and only child, who is approaching college, miss him. He has monstrous legal bills. His unique bond with the president is under stress. His most important work is done.”
Allen crystal-balls not just the imminent departure of Rove, but also foresees that “within a year the president will have a new chief of staff and press secretary, probably a new treasury secretary and maybe a new defense secretary.”
One “frustrated conservative” tells Allen, “it’s like it’s twilight in America.”
Over at Newsweek, seven blocks north of the Time-Life building, Howard Fineman is not so quick to sweep Rove into the dustbin of history. But he, too, is trying to read “the tea leaves” and figure out how long the man affectionately known as “Turd Blossom” can last. Mostly he marvels at what he calls Rove’s “survivability,” quoting one fellow Republican strategist who says, “Mere mortals would be affected. But Karl isn’t mortal.” (You can already see the bumper stickers.)
Without saying so outright, both Allen and Fineman imply that, leak involvement or no leak involvement, Rove has become a liability worth throwing overboard. But all one needs to do to get a different view is turn to the Weekly Standard and Bill Kristol, who pens an exact opposite appraisal — that it is Rove’s departure that would be deadly.
“Would firing Rove help Bush?” Kristol asks. “No. It would reflect an attempt by Bush to find favor among ‘good government’ moderates and allegedly reasonable critics. It would signal a repudiation of the dominant political strategy of Bush’s first term. And it would most likely prove a disaster.”
Kristol argues that when Bush tries to play the moderate, he hurts himself. To him, the key to a Bush rebound is to take a hard, uncompromising swerve into the arms of his conservative base. And Rove, who Kristol calls “the master of polarization politics,” is the man — the only man, apparently — who can unerringly guide him there.
Dr. Kristol offers the following prescription for the ailing president: “Keeping Rove; being unapologetic about the war; explaining why Saddam had to be removed, that there were terror ties between Saddam and al Qaeda, and why the war needs to be seen through to victory; fighting for Alito, and other well-qualified conservative judges at the appellate level; advancing pro-growth, pro-family tax reforms — this agenda won’t enamor Bush to liberals. But it could lay the groundwork for a Bush comeback. The alternative is three long years of ducking, dodging — and defeat.”
Batter up!
Gal Beckerman is a former staff writer at CJR and a writer and editor for the New York Times Book Review.