Should we ascribe any significance to the fact that the Observer article reports that Viveca will be interviewed by Fitzy but will NOT go before the grand jury?
Good question.
I'm going to take my layman's stab at this, and why it means Rove is in deep shit.
The story says this interview will be an on the record deposition. Since we can probably assume that Viveca is not a hostile witness or a target, it's also probably true that Fitzy has already had a conversation with her, or at least with her attorney, wherein he has determined what her testimony will be. So this deposition is to get it on the record.
More on the flip. . .
Now, if I'm right, we can conjecture a bit more about what this means.
If Fitzy began to prepare the grand jury today with an overview of his next case, prior to getting Viveca under oath and on the record, then this suggests to me that he has determined that her testimony will not affect whatever case he intends to bring before the grand jury, if indeed he is about ready to ask for an indictment.
If Viveca had critical testimony material to whatever case Fitzy wants to bring to the grand jury, he would probably not have spent three hours with the grand jury before getting her on the record.
That at least is how it seems to play out, to me.
And, if I'm right about all this, then it suggests that Fitzy has determined that Viveca Novak's testimony is not exculpatory of Rove, and not so material to whatever case he is bringing that he needs to have her testify in front of the grand jury.
Bottom line: it may mean Rove is about out of escape hatches.