Karl Rove Agrees To Testify

A deal has been reached whereby Karl Rove will finally testify, under oath, before the House Judiciary Committee, according to chairman John Conyers' office.

Rove has long avoided and ignored subpoenas in the past by claiming executive privilege -- his deference now comes as a big victory for many Bush administration critics.

Here is the press release:

In an agreement reached today between the former Bush Administration and Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Karl Rove and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers will testify before the House Judiciary Committee in transcribed depositions under penalty of perjury. The Committee has also reserved the right to have public testimony from Rove and Miers. It was agreed that invocations of official privileges would be significantly limited.

In addition, if the Committee uncovers information necessitating his testimony, the Committee will also have the right to depose William Kelley, a former White House lawyer who played a role in the U.S. Attorney firings.

The Committee will also receive Bush White House documents relevant to this inquiry. Under the agreement, the landmark ruling by Judge John Bates rejecting key Bush White House claims of executive immunity and privilege will be preserved. If the agreement is breached, the Committee can resume the litigation.

Chairman Conyers issued the following statement:

"I have long said that I would see this matter through to the end and am encouraged that we have finally broken through the Bush Administration's claims of absolute immunity. This is a victory for the separation of powers and congressional oversight. It is also a vindication of the search for truth. I am determined to have it known whether U.S. Attorneys in the Department of Justice were fired for political reasons, and if so, by whom."

Following up on the news, House Speaker Pelosi has released this statement touting a victory for justice:

"The agreement for Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify upholds a fundamental principle: no one is above the law and Congressional subpoenas must be complied with.

"As public officials, we take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. It is the institutional duty of Congress -- as an independent branch -- to ensure against abuse of power through meaningful oversight over the Executive Branch. When there are credible allegations about the politicization of law enforcement, the need for Congressional oversight is at its greatest.

"In upholding our oaths of office, the House of Representatives was determined to preserve checks and balances -- the separation of powers that protects the rule of law. It brought action in court to enforce the Judiciary Committee's subpoenas, and won a major ruling by U.S. District Judge John Bates dismissing the extreme position of absolute immunity from Congressional oversight advocated by the Bush Administration for former Administration officials. Under this agreement, the precedent established by Judge Bates' historic ruling rejecting this extreme Bush Administration doctrine will be preserved.

"Today's agreement is a great victory for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the separation of powers. I appreciate the strong leadership of Chairman John Conyers and the assistance of the Obama Administration.

"Congress now has the opportunity to uncover the truth and determine whether improper criteria were used by the Bush Administration to dismiss and retain U.S. Attorneys."

Comments

[bonum]

04:50 PM on 03/13/2009

Bush lied, people died, and are still dying

GRILL, BABY, GRILL!!

[realitychecks]

12:29 PM on 03/05/2009

He had no choice,subpeonaed.

[chrish]

11:50 AM on 03/05/2009

"Agrees to testify"? Deigns to talk to the little people is more like it and as others note, he will likely "not recall" anything incriminating.

[acacia72]

11:45 AM on 03/05/2009

I don't see this going anywhere except as a waste of taxpayers money. The POTUS can hire and fire attorneys at will, so INTENT will have to be proven, and rove and myers will just shrug their shoulders and say, "What, me worry?" They have NOTHING to worry about unfortunately. Besides, as one poster said, "Since when do you negotiate subpoenas?" Bingo. I'd focus instead on the Plame scandal.

Treason is a much juicier charge anyway.

[qdog112]

12:33 PM on 03/05/2009

Everything you said is wrong, except the last line.

[fireW]

01:04 PM on 03/05/2009

That's the triumph of Reagan-speak, where repubs call treason "superpatriotism". Recall that Ronnie called Ollie North a "national hero". We've seen for more than two decades that, for them, treason is heroic. Mystically delusional . . .

[lovetheusa13]

11:44 AM on 03/05/2009

Karl the ARCHITECT is smarter with his brain tied behind his back than the democrates investigating him. I mean he did get GW elected twice. I see a 1980 coming again where the people see what idiots the big spendinding libs really are. You do remember the great LANDSLIDE in the 80's a** whipping. Just don'tscrew it up so bad we cant fix it.

[gmlaster]

12:50 PM on 03/05/2009

A) The correct spelling is "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-S", not "democrates". Don't believe me...check the dictionary.

B) The first Bush election was decided by the Supreme Court, not the voters. So if Rove had a hand in that, he should be jailed for election tampering.

C) If you see 1980 coming again, you seriously need to get your eyes checked. Since 1980, the GOP has screwed up this country and the economy of the entire planet so completely that their next chance for election to the White House won't be until sometime around the year 5000.

D) The only ones screaming about the government FINALLY at long last spending some big money on taxpayers for a change are the people who benefited the most from 30 years of tax cuts.

Wake up! They've already screwed it up so bad we can't fix it. If you actually DID love the USA, you would see that for yourself and be mad as hell...just like the rest of us.

[BPCentrisAmerican]

01:51 PM on 03/05/2009

Tell me why do conservatives love closeted homos so much? Just curious.

[lornejl]

11:42 AM on 03/05/2009

Paddy cake paddy cake bakers man...

I'm tired of this kids game, get on with restoring the rule of law for krist sakes.

[lovetheusa13]

12:02 PM on 03/05/2009

The rule of law. You must be kidding. How about the "rule of Law" for illegal immigration?

[clamperken]

11:19 AM on 03/05/2009

The only deal should be either obey the supenas issued or go to jail for contempt. The idea that any special treatment be given just to get someone to testify is a travisty to our system of justice. When those who have been supenaed are allowed to dictate the terms of thier compliance, it seems to remove the power of supena.

[Politicallyinterested]

11:12 AM on 03/05/2009

He belongs in one place for a while, a jail.

[RTIII]

11:04 AM on 03/05/2009

Pelosi's words are as hypocritical as any ever spoken.
.

[brovold]

10:47 AM on 03/05/2009

This Quisling makes me ashamed of my Norwegian heritage..along with Grover Norquist and (the late) Joe Foss. Uff-da!

[Politicallyinterested]

11:11 AM on 03/05/2009

If you knew Norwegians well, you'd see that there is little reason to be proud of a Norwegian heritage and that the ones you mentioned are just like most Norwegians found in Norway. Norwegians are pretty corrupt: Don't do business with them! Norwegian culture is one of the most disingenuous and fabricated, such as the traditions that really only go back the 1800's. Norwegians don't even really speak what was once Norwegian, Icelanders do. Old Norwegian was replaced by Danish. Today's Norwegian is Danish spoken with Norwegian accents, in a Norwegian way, and with some Norwegian words.

[antiprop1]

11:16 AM on 03/05/2009

They are great skiiers though

[Politicallyinterested]

11:40 AM on 03/05/2009

P.S. No need to romanticize about the Vikings. The Vikings were barbaric pirates. That is why they became known as the Vikings. They stole, burned and raped where ever they went. They liked picking on easily attackable religious communities. The Viking period ended with their Christianization and acceptance of the need to become more civilized.

At the same time they were not the most fierce warriors. During the Byzantine period of the Roman Empire, they tried to overtake Constantinople. That just did not work against the Greek-speaking military. They then instead became servants to Greek-speaking Roman emperors as guards, called the Varangian guards. They were paid in gold and treasure after an emperor's deaths. Even two Norwegian Viking kings were servants to Greek-speaking Emperors, one was called Harald Hardrada. He was imprisoned for treason or something like that during the end of his service. He was the last Norwegian Viking king.

[dems08]

10:32 AM on 03/05/2009

Huffpo stuck this headline on this story to get a reaction out of you guys - come on, you know by now how this works.

The agreement was between the boosh administration lawyers and the House Judiciary Committee.

This has been going through the court for some time, and the judge(s) were about to make a decision, which could have gone either way.

Rove and Miers wll testify before the House Judiciary Committee, not under oath, but it's illegal to lie when testifying to Congress, whether under oath or not.

If Committee members know or suspect that either one is lying, omitting, etc., they can schedule a public hearing, and according to the agreement, Rove and/or Miers will testify publicly, or else they'll be subject to prosecution by the DOJ.

Sounds good to me.

[Justtellthetruth]

10:15 AM on 03/05/2009

Most of the people he will be sitting in front of were there and HELPED him start the war and trash the constitution in the first place, in that they voted for the war, its funding and the patriot act.

This is no more consequential than a reality television show, and the intent is to get the faces of these political hacks on tv in prime time news soundbytes rather than ANYTHING to do with justice.

In fact if Rove had to sit in front of kid Rock, Pamela Anderson, and Bobby Brown, they would probably ask more probing questions.

[acacia72]

11:33 AM on 03/05/2009

Justtellthetruth, I'm afraid you are exactly right.

Wouldn't it be great if you were dead wrong?

It's so obvious this is a dog and pony show from the "negotiating" and the revelation that Rove and Myers "agreed" to testify.

WTF?! They should have been shackled and hauled in January 21! (Actually, long before that).

Justice? HAH! I'll believe it when I see it!

[Prakosh]

10:14 AM on 03/05/2009

The deal which evidently makes Obama look as bad as Bush was a last minute attempt to prevent the Obama administration from having to openly support, through the justice department, the indictment of Karl Rove. I had hoped that Obama would reverse the usurpation of the Presidential powers that Bush had so diligently worked to create from a gross misreading of the Constitution. Obama has, he apparently doesn't believe the president, should be a dictator, something that Bush not only joked about but tried to legally create. But in lieu of dictatorial powers, Obama wants to preserve all possible protections for his own "presidential advisers." So we have this terrible and disastrous deal where Rove is not under oath or testifying in public (and how many times have we seen reporters and bloggers with better analytical skills than the people who represent them in the Senate and the House?) but is subject to charges of perjury. I personally don't get it. And I am not happy with this situation, apparently power is corrupting Obama, where does it end...

[dems08]

10:35 AM on 03/05/2009

Wow. There's so many mistakes in what you wrote, it's hard to know where to begin.

I'll just say that lying when testifying before Congress is illegal - whether one is under oath or not.

[gmlaster]

01:15 PM on 03/05/2009

So true. Just ask Bill Clinton. Remember the millions we spent to impeach him for perjuring himself about a personal matter?

[TLV]

10:36 AM on 03/05/2009

Silly prognostications....wait until the show starts.

[scooperss]

10:05 AM on 03/05/2009

I wonder if pelosi thought before she said--

""The agreement for Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify upholds a fundamental principle: no one is above the law and Congressional subpoenas must be complied with."

[dems08]

10:17 AM on 03/05/2009

The booshies were fighting against rove and miers testifying - in court.

The agreement was made before the judge(s) made a decision, which could have gone either way.

Rove and Miers will have to answers the questions put to them by the House Judiciary Committee.

This is what we wanted. If they lie to Congress, they can be prosecuted.

Plus, Congress keeps the right to have them appear at a public Congressional hearing.

Sounds like a win to me!

[ivy]

10:05 AM on 03/05/2009

Congress has to "reach an agreement" with these arrogant, hubris-stuffed thugs? Would the authorities have to "reach an agreement" with me if I defiantly violated the law, committing felony after felony, if I trampled on the law and almost every standard of honor and principle we're supposed to observe in this country? If I committed one offense half as serious as these people have, I'd be cooling my heels with a really menacing cell mate.

They may appear at a hearing, but they'll invoke the 5th and plead "I cannot recall" so many times we'll all be hearing it in our sleep.

[acacia72]

11:37 AM on 03/05/2009

Ivy, you are SO right it makes me ill; I couldn't agree more!