 Empty chair the Judiciary Committee saw the last time |
Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Monday subpoenaed former White House adviser Karl Rove, The Hill reported. The subpoena is intended to compel Rove to testify about his role in the dismissal of nine U.S. attorneys during the administration of former President George W. Bush, as well as the Justice Department’s prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, the report said.
Rove is one of several former White House officials who refused to testify voluntarily in the House and Senate in 2007 on the dismissal of the federal prosecutors. The Bush White House offered to allow executive branch officials to be interviewed behind closed doors, but insisted the officials could not be put under oath and there would be no transcripts of the interviews.
Rove has claimed executive privilege exemption from being compelled to testify but a federal court has rejected the claim.
“I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court, and today’s action is an important step along the way,” said Conyers in announcing the subpoena.
Is this the point where Rove switches from “executive privilege” to the Fifth Amendment?
And this time he won’t have the White House or its Dept of injustice to hide behind.
Nope. As much as freedom loving people hate to admit it, Rove is way smarter than any regular bunch of politicians. You can be sure he has his bases covered.
This is just another round of Democratic grandstanding which ultimately will waste a bunch of taxpayer money and go nowhere.
I hope Rove declines again. Then there won’t be anyone to stop having him arrested this time. I want to see his ass in jail. I also think the vast majority of Americans would also.
Is it too late for Bush to pardon Rove for interfering with the Attorney General’s office?
I know it’s not as serious an offense as getting blow job in the oval office for a government investigation but pretty darn close.
#2 – Ah_Yea
You’re right, Former President Rove is as sharp as a tack. I’m sure if there’s going to be any sacrificial lamb(s) in the clean-up of this debacle, it won’t be him. Maybe they can recycle Scooter Pie. He’s already tainted, and a felon to boot.
Unfortunately, Rove’s IQ is higher than the sum of the entire Dem Congressional leadership. Nonetheless, this should be entertaining.
Wow, I thought even the House Democrats had dropped the Alabama governor ‘scandal’. It was so obvious their witness was lying and that 60 Minutes was duped again.
I suspect Pres. Obama doesn’t want Democrats saying that Attorneys shouldn’t be fired by the President. However, it would be entertaining to watch. No doubt decades from now Hollywood liberals will remake it into a great victory for liberals like Frost/Nixon.
Why not focus on the issue? Why did 9 US attorneys get let go during the Bush administration? Why did Clinton get rid of, what was it, 93 and there was no investigation.
Couldn’t have been too bad since the mainstream media just spooged all over themselves to keep from pointing out Clinton did it as well.
# 8 Mr Diesel said, “Why did Clinton get rid of, what was it, 93 and there was no investigation.”
Would any hard core Dems care to answer this one?
#3: I’m with you, Fusion! This clown isn’t employed or protected by the government any longer. Time to haul him into a courtroom, even if he just keeps bleating the Fifth Amendment like a broken record. You can bet anyone else would have been arrested for contempt of court long ago.
#9 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>Would any hard core Dems care to
>>answer this one?
If you really don’t know the answer to this, Paddy-RAMBO, you are stupider than I thought.
Clinton replaced the US attorneys as soon as he assumed office. This is commonplace, and Reagan, Pappy Bush, and many other POTUSes have done this. These are typically political appointments, and that goes with the territory.
What Clinton did NOT do (and what draw attention to the sleazy nature of Dumbya’s dealings) was appoint US attorneys at the beginning of his term, find out which ones were suck-asses, and then DISMISS THE REST OF THEM in order to impede criminal investigations against his cronies.
That’s what Dumbya did, and that’s just one of the reasons ‘berto Gonzo is under a cloud of criminal suspicion.
Please show us some evidence of the other Presidents firing all US attorneys upon taking office.
>What Clinton did NOT do … DISMISS THE REST OF THEM in order to impede criminal investigations against his cronies.
No he just hid his dismissal of the Arkansas attorney by firing all of them. A brilliant move.
Paddy…if Rove was so smart, why did his administration fail so miserably?
Wait…you won’t answer. Or if you do it’ll be a riddle. Nevermind.
313 – Lyin’ Mike
>>Please show us some evidence of the other
>>Presidents firing all US attorneys upon
>>taking office.
Whassamatta, Lyin’ Mike? Haven’t you learned to use The Google yet? Jeez, there’s even a whole section on this in Wiki-whatever.
Bush’s thugs’ hand-picking of the non-ass-suckers to get rid of mid-term is unprecedented.
“Dismissal of U.S. Attorneys under previous administrations
By tradition, U.S. Attorneys are replaced only at the start of a new White House administration. U.S. Attorneys hold a “political” office, and therefore they are considered to “serve at the pleasure of the President.” At the beginning of a new presidential administration, it is traditional for all 93 U.S. Attorneys to submit a letter of resignation. When a new President is from a different political party, almost all of the resignations will be eventually accepted.[157] The attorneys are then replaced by new political appointees, typically from the new President’s party.[158][159][158]
A Department of Justice list noted that “in 1981, Reagan’s first year in office, 71 of 93 districts had new U.S. attorneys. In 1993, Clinton’s first year, 80 of 93 districts had new U.S. attorneys.” Similarly, a Senate study noted that “Reagan replaced 89 of the 93 U.S. attorneys in his first two years in office. President Clinton had 89 new U.S. attorneys in his first two years, and President Bush had 88 new U.S. attorneys in his first two years.”[160]
In contrast to the 2006 dismissals, Presidents rarely dismiss U.S. attorneys they appoint.[158][159] Kyle Sampson, Chief of Staff at the Department of Justice, noted in a January 9, 2006, e-mail to Harriet Miers: “In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys they had appointed, but instead permitted such U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover provision” (underlining original).[161] There is no precedent for a President to dismiss several U.S attorneys at one time while in the middle period of the presidential term in office.[162][163]
The few examples of forced dismissals available are based on misconduct. The Congressional Research Service investigated the precedent of dismissing U.S. Attorneys over the 25 years 1981-2006 and identified 54 attorneys who did not serve their full 4-year term. Of these, only two were documented involuntary dismissals: William Kennedy in 1982 and J. William Petro in 1984. Both were Reagan appointees. Kennedy was dismissed for “for asserting that the CIA had pressured DOJ to pressure him not to pursue a case,” and Petro was dismissed for “disclosing information about an indictment.”[164] [165] However, all of the U.S. Attorneys dismissed in 2006 were in office longer than four years, and appointments lasting into a President’s second term were beyond the scope of the study.[166][167] Before 1981, President Carter replaced U.S. Attorney David Marston at the request of Democratic Representative Joshua Eilberg. Marston had been investigating corruption charges against Eilberg and Daniel Flood, another Democratic Representative.[168] The probe continued after the attorney was replaced, however, and Eilberg lost his 1978 reelection bid. Eilberg was eventually sentenced to five years probation and a $10,000 fine,[169][168] and Flood was censured for bribery by 96th United States Congress.[170]
# 11 Mister Mustard said, “Clinton replaced the US attorneys as soon as he assumed office.”
During that time, allegations regarding Clintons’ Whitewater dealings were coming close to indictment. By firing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once, Clinton conveniently cleared the positions to appoint a friend, Paula Casey as the U.S. Attorney for Little Rock. Casey never did bring any big Whitewater indictments,”
That was TOO easy.
Next.
# 13 Olo Baggins of Bilge water said, “Paddy…if Rove was so smart, why did his administration fail so miserably? ”
It was Bush’s administration, Rove’s job was to make sure W was elected and reelected. He succeeded.
Next lame question.
#15 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>By firing all 93 U.S. Attorneys at once
Uh, he didn’t “fire” them, P-RAM. They all submitted their letters of resignation, as is customary when a different party occupies the White House.
You might want to follow in the footsteps of ‘dro, and STFU. The more you talk, the more of the immense breadth and depth of your ignorance is revealed.
No wonder they’re thinking of laying you off at the ‘Shack. Obama’s “oppressive tax plan”, my ass.
# 17 Mister Mustard said, “#15 – Paddy-RAMBO”
You lose. There is CLEAR evidence that Clinton fired a US Atty who was investigating him for criminal wrongdoing and replaced him with a friend.
Done.
I admit that when I posted asking for a “hard core Dem” to answer, it was a set up. Anyone who is hardcore Dem OR Repub is by definition stupid and unable to think logically.
#16 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>It was Bush’s administration, Rove’s job was
>>to make sure W was elected and reelected.
Not even YOU can actually believe this nonesense, P-RAM. President Rove/ Cheney was the “brains” (such as they were) behind Dumbya’s administration. If it were “Dumbya’s administration”, they would have handed out coloring books and crayons.
He was Dumbya’s Deputy Chief of Staff, fer chrissakes, and as such was implicated in (and investigated regarding) countless scandals during the 8-year reign of terror.
#18 – Paddy-RAMBO
>>Anyone who is hardcore Dem OR Repub is by
>>definition stupid and unable to think
>>logically.
Since you’re the hardest core Repug on dvorak dot org slash blog, I guess that speaks volumes about YOU, eh, P-RAM?
>>There is CLEAR evidence that Clinton fired a
>>US Atty who was investigating him for
>>criminal wrongdoing and replaced him with a
>>friend.
Care to share some of that CLEAR evidence with us?
Or is this just going to go on the ever-mounting shit-pile of all the other cockamamie claims and allegations that you have made, only to have you become scarce as hens’ teeth when someone calls you on your bullshit?
Hmmm, Paddy-RAMBO?
Countless scandals, when even the most bogus of stories is believed. Then again the people on this blog seem to believe the story about Rove asking someone to tape the Ala Governor having an affair. In the middle of a big election campaign, that was his priority.
For the record what is the count of number of indictments and convictions for the George Bush Administration?
It looks to me to be one of the most ethical administrations in history.
If Rove claimed executive protection during Bush’s term for acts done during that period and for the executive branch, then wouldn’t it seem that that same protection is still in place after he leaves?
Now If he commits a crime after 20-Jan-2009, then he is open to prosecution. But I don’t think that just because Bush’s term expired removes any protections he had during that time.
# 20 Mister Mustard said, “Since you’re the hardest core Repug on dvorak dot”
Actually, I haven’t voted for a Repub in MANY years.
Lose again. AND, proved my point about the lack of intelligence in blind partisans…
#15 Please enlighten us as to the charges or indictments dealing with Whitewater that Kenny “60 million in taxpayer’s dollars burnin’ a hole in my pocket” Starr brought against President Clinton?
# 25 Zabes said, “#15 Please enlighten us as to the charges or indictments dealing with Whitewater that Kenny”
I never said anything about Starr. What ARE you babbling about?
Mike…so Rove is what, a great American hero? You know what “deluded” means, right?
Rove is widely regarded among all his political opponents, both R and D, as one of the most devious and vindictive bastards of the modern era. The man has no morals, no standards of decency, and apparently no conscience.
#26,
The point is that if a rabid partisan hack like Kenny couldn’t make the case on whitewater with 60 million and an army of neo-con lawyers, Why bitch and moan about Paula Casey not making the case when clearly there was no there, there.
#18, Cow-Paddy,
When are you going to learn that the “Democratic Party” on this site are more than a few steps ahead of you. In case you haven’t noticed, we don’t post claims without being able to back them up. And we aren’t hesitant to ask the right wing nuts to back up their bullshit.
If there is clear evidence to back up your claim, you will.
#21, Lyin’ Mike,
What the eff are you babbling about?
#23, Ron,
How soon Republicans forget. Or do the Hearings on Clinton’s Pardons after his Administration finished ring a bell.
# 27 Olo Baggins of Bilge water said, “The man has no morals, no standards of decency, and apparently no conscience.”
Sounds like most of the pols in D.C. However, that doesn’t make for a successful case….