Thank you, Sir. You simply confirmed what I was pretty sure I was reading: Rove is free and clear. I just couldn't figure out why the copy essentially said that Rove was free and clear, but the authors continued to say that he wasn't. You'd thing I'd be immune to NYT jujitsu after all these years!
Instead of using the headline "Rove Reportedly Held Phone Talk on C.I.A. Officer", the Times should have used "Rove not source of leak".