Following reports that special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald has told White House senior adviser Karl Rove that he does not anticipate charging Rove in connection with the CIA leak investigation, Media Matters for America has compiled a list of questions previously asked about Karl Rove by the media, which the White House has to date refused to answer, citing the ongoing nature of the investigation. Now that Fitzgerald has apparently decided not to pursue charges against Rove, the White House's stock response would presumably no longer apply to questions concerning Rove and his involvement in the disclosure of the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Media Matters has already urged reporters to ask about Rove's security clearance, given that, as Media Matters has previously explained, both Rove's apparent confirmation of Plame's identity to syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak and his alleged disclosure of her identity to Time's Matthew Cooper should trigger the loss of his security clearance under the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement.

But there are numerous other questions the media previously asked, which they presumably would still consider important and in response to which -- with respect to Rove -- the White House can apparently no longer cite an ongoing investigation:

• Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak of a name of a CIA operative? (July 11, 2005)
• Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove? (July 11, 2005)
• Newsweek put out a story, an email saying that Karl Rove passed national security information on to a reporter that outed a CIA officer. Now, are you saying that the president is not taking any action in response to that? (July 11, 2005)
• [I]sn't the difficulty that you have said to the public, dating back to 2003, affirmatively, Karl Rove is not involved, and now we have evidence to the contrary? So how do you reconcile those two things? How does the president reconcile those two things? (July 12, 2005)
• We know that Karl Rove spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife, referring to the fact that she worked at the [Central Intelligence] Agency. You've heard Democrats who say that -- say today that alone was inappropriate conduct. What was Karl Rove trying to accomplish by having the conversation he did? And does the president think that it was fair of him to do that? Was it fair game? (July 12, 2005)
• [Y]ou are continuously saying it's an ongoing investigation. But it's also an ongoing news story that has opened up what has been described as a credibility gap here. Do you not sense -- is there no sense here that perhaps you, the president and/or Karl need to say something more about this situation to close that gap? (July 12, 2005)
• [D]oes the president think Karl Rove did something wrong, or doesn't he? (July 13, 2005)
• Remind me, how long is [Rove] going to stay on the staff? (July 14, 2005)
• In Chicago in December of '03, the president said, “I want to know who the leakers are.” Separate from the legal issue, is the president convinced now that Karl Rove was one of the leakers? (July 20, 2005)
• Has Karl Rove offered to resign, in view of his problems? (July 27, 2005)
• Is it true that the president slapped Karl Rove upside the head a couple of years ago over the CIA leak? (October 19, 2005)
• [S]ome [...] Democrats are saying that the president should fire Karl Rove. What's your reaction to that? (October 31, 2005)
• [W]hether or not it was a crime, does the president feel that Karl Rove acted appropriately in this matter, given what he knows about his involvement? (November 1, 2005)
• Does the president think that Karl Rove lived up to the highest ethical standards? (November 8, 2005)

From the July 11, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: Does the president stand by his pledge to fire anyone involved in the leak of a name of a CIA operative?

McCLELLAN: Terry, I appreciate your question. I think your question is being asked relating to some reports that are in reference to an ongoing criminal investigation. The criminal investigation that you reference is something that continues at this point. And as I've previously stated, while that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.

[...]

QUESTION: Wait, wait -- so you're now saying that after you cleared Rove and the others from that podium, then the prosecutors asked you not to speak anymore, and since then, you haven't?

McCLELLAN: Again, you're continuing to ask questions relating to an ongoing criminal investigation, and I'm just not going to respond any further.

[...]

QUESTION: Does the president continue to have confidence in Mr. Rove?

McCLELLAN: Again, these are all questions coming up in the context of an ongoing criminal investigation. And you've heard my response on this.

[...]

QUESTION: There's a difference between commenting publicly on an action and taking action in response to it. Newsweek put out a story, an email saying that Karl Rove passed national security information on to a reporter that outed a CIA officer. Now, are you saying that the president is not taking any action in response to that? Because I presume that the prosecutor did not ask you not to take action, and that if he did, you still would not necessarily abide by that; that the president is free to respond to news reports, regardless of whether there's an investigation or not. So are you saying that he's not going to do anything about this until the investigation is fully over and done with?

McCLELLAN: Well, I think the president has previously spoken to this. This continues to be an ongoing criminal investigation. No one wants to get to the bottom of it more than the president of the United States. And we're just not going to have more to say on it until that investigation is complete.

From the July 12, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: But isn't the difficulty that you have said to the public, dating back to 2003, affirmatively, Karl Rove is not involved, and now we have evidence to the contrary? So how do you reconcile those two things? How does the president reconcile those two things?

McCLELLAN: Again, if I were to get into discussing this, I would be getting into discussing an investigation that continues and could be prejudging the outcome of the investigation. I'm not going to do that from this podium.

[...]

QUESTION: Well, we'll see. But I just have one final question on this. The question of whether a law has been broken, a crime committed, is a separate matter. You're not going to resolve that; that's for a grand jury to decide. But we know what the facts are. We know that Karl Rove spoke about Joseph Wilson's wife, referring to the fact that she worked at the [Central Intelligence] Agency. You've heard Democrats who say that -- say today that alone was inappropriate conduct. What was Karl Rove trying to accomplish by having the conversation he did? And does the president think that it was fair of him to do that? Was it fair game?

McCLELLAN: Now, that's a question related to an ongoing investigation. The investigation continues, David. I think you know that very well. I've responded to that question.

[...]

QUESTION: Scott, back on the Rove question, you are continuously saying it's an ongoing investigation. But it's also an ongoing news story that has opened up what has been described as a credibility gap here. Do you not sense -- is there no sense here that perhaps you, the president and/or Karl need to say something more about this situation to close that gap?

McCLELLAN: Well, Bob, I think that if I started getting into questions relating to this investigation, I might be harming that investigation from moving forward.

From the July 13, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: Scott, you know what, to make a general observation here, in a previous administration, if a press secretary had given the sort of answers you've just given in referring to the fact that everybody who works here enjoys the confidence of the president, Republicans would have hammered them as having a kind of legalistic and sleazy defense. I mean, the reality is that you're parsing words, and you've been doing it for a few days now. So does the president think Karl Rove did something wrong, or doesn't he?

McCLELLAN: No, David, I'm not at all. I told you and the president told you earlier today that we don't want to prejudge the outcome of an ongoing investigation.

[...]

QUESTION: That's a dodge to my question. It has nothing to do with the investigation. Is it appropriate for a senior official to speak about a covert agent in any way, shape, or form without first finding out whether that person is working as a covert officer.

McCLELLAN: Well, first of all, you're wrong. This is all relating to questions about an ongoing investigation, and I've been through this.

From the July 14, 2005, White House press gaggle:

QUESTION: Remind me, how long is he going to stay on the staff?

McCLELLAN: That's a nice try to keep bringing up questions relating to media reports about an ongoing investigation. As the president indicated yesterday, we are not going to prejudge an ongoing investigation based on media reports.

[...]

QUESTION: Does the president believe it's appropriate for the RNC to continue to weigh in on this matter? They put out another memo today, with a top-10 Joseph Wilson lies. If indeed it's an ongoing investigation and it's improper for the White House to discuss it, does he think it's proper for the Republican Party to weigh in on it?

McCLELLAN: You know, Geoff, I appreciate the question, and as you heard me say yesterday, we are not going to prejudge the outcome of the investigation based on media reports. And I'm not going to get into --

QUESTION: What about the RNC, though, Scott?

McCLELLAN: No, I said, I'm not going to get into discussing matters relating to an ongoing investigation. We'll let the investigation come to a conclusion, and then I'll be more than happy to talk about it, as will the president.

From the July 20, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: In Chicago in December of '03, the president said, “I want to know who the leakers are.” Separate from the legal issue, is the president convinced now that Karl Rove was one of the leakers?

McCLELLAN: I've answered these questions, and I don't have anything to say beyond what I've already said.

From the July 27, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: Has Karl Rove offered to resign, in view of his problems?

McCLELLAN: Again, you keep asking these questions that are related to an ongoing investigation --

QUESTION: Does he still have his security clearance?

McCLELLAN: -- and those are questions that have already been addressed.

QUESTION: No, they -- I've never heard this before. Have you?

McCLELLAN: The question has been asked before.

From the October 19, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: Scott, is it true that the president --

McCLELLAN: Welcome back.

QUESTION: Thanks. Is it true that the president slapped Karl Rove upside the head a couple of years ago over the CIA leak?

McCLELLAN: Are you referring to, what, a New York Daily News report? Two things: One, we're not commenting on an ongoing investigation; two, and I would challenge the overall accuracy of that news account.

QUESTION: That's a comment.

QUESTION: Which part of it?

QUESTION: Yes, that is.

QUESTION: Which facts --

McCLELLAN: No, I'm just saying -- no, I'm just trying to help you all.

QUESTION: So what facts are you challenging?

McCLELLAN: Again, I'm not going to comment on an ongoing investigation.

QUESTION: You can't say you're challenging the facts and then not say which ones you're challenging.

McCLELLAN: Yes, I can. I just did.

From the October 31, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: Another part of that is, some of the same Democrats are saying that the president should fire Karl Rove. What's your reaction to that?

McCLELLAN: Again, there is an ongoing investigation; we need to let that investigation continue.

[...]

QUESTION: But don't you think, Scott, that that second part of your job has been damaged, your credibility has been damaged by this?

McCLELLAN: For me to even respond to that question would force me to talk about an ongoing investigation and legal proceeding, and we've been directed not to do that. Whether or not that puts me in a difficult position is another matter. But I have enough confidence in the relationship that we've built over the last few years to be able to move forward, and for you all to know that what I'm saying from this podium is based on the facts and based on me working to provide an accurate account of what's going on here in Washington, D.C.

From the November 1, 2005, White House press briefing:

QUESTION: But whether or not it was a crime, does the president feel that Karl Rove acted appropriately in this matter, given what he knows about his involvement?

McCLELLAN: See, you're asking that context -- asking that question in the context of an ongoing investigation and an ongoing legal proceeding. And as I indicated to you all on Friday, our Counsel's Office has directed us not to discuss any issues related to that, whether they're factual circumstances or legal issues relating to the investigation. That's the policy that's been in place for some time, and that's the policy that we're following.

From the November 8, 2005, White House press briefing:

McCLELLAN: Well, this was -- the president made this decision in light of recent circumstances, that we should take this action. And that's why he directed the Counsel's Office to proceed with these refresher briefings. Every White House staffer has to go through ethics briefings when they come on to the staff. You also have to go through detailed briefings when you're provided security clearances -- before you're provided those security clearances you go through very detailed briefings. And next week there will be briefings conducted for remaining employees that do not have security clearances. So we thought that -- the president thought that this was an appropriate time to move ahead with these refresher briefings, and that's why he directed this course of action be taken.

QUESTION: This is over two weeks. Where are the briefings held? And how many, like, typically in a class?

McCLELLAN: They're held over in the New Executive Office Building, or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. There's an auditorium over there.

QUESTION: Is this all we should expect from the president, the ethics refresher courses, the extent of his reaction to the indictment?

McCLELLAN: Well, as you're aware, if you're asking a question about an ongoing investigation, we're not going to have further say at this point while it continues. It is a very serious matter, and we are going to continue to cooperate. That's what the president directed us to do and that's what we are doing.

QUESTION: I asked you a different question. Is this the full extent of what the president deems necessary, “in light of circumstances?”

McCLELLAN: The president is always free to take the action that he feels is appropriate.

QUESTION: Does the president think that Karl Rove lived up to the highest ethical standards?

McCLELLAN: Again, that's a question relating to an ongoing investigation.