Rove Deposed In U.S. Attorney Probe

WASHINGTON — Former Bush White House official Karl Rove was questioned by House Judiciary Committee lawyers Tuesday on any role he may have played in politically motivated firings of U.S. attorneys.

Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., confirmed Rove's closed-door appearance through a committee spokesman who was not authorized to be quoted by name.

The committee has been seeking answers on who created the list of federal prosecutors who would lose their jobs. Conyers has suspected the trail led to the White House but couldn't prove it. Former President George W. Bush asserted executive privilege for Rove and former White House lawyer Harriet Miers and refused to let them testify.

An agreement was struck in March between Rove's lawyer and the committee for Rove, who was Bush's top political adviser, to testify on the prosecutors' firings, as well as the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama. Siegelman, a Democrat, has alleged that his prosecution was pushed by Republicans, including Rove.

The agreement called for Rove to testify "under the penalty for perjury," Conyers has said. The committee could release the transcripts afterward, but the agreement also allowed for public testimony.

Nine U.S. attorneys were fired. An internal Bush Justice Department investigation concluded that political considerations played a part in at least four of the dismissals.

Rove's appearance before the Judiciary Committee was first reported Tuesday night by the Web site Politico.

Comments

[madtom]

Depositions today, depositions tomorrow, depositions FOREVER!

The Bushies will BEG for a prison cell in The Hague!

[TaxDayMan]

Isn't that legal harrasment, Lib?

[expired]

Once again, Nothing will come of this.

[TaxDayMan]

Maybe because there is no crime other than beating the Libs in two presidential elections?

[RoveRoveRoveYourBoat]

...life is but a dream!

[TaxDayMan]

I will ask again "What law (Title, chapter, and verse) of US Code did the Bush Administration violate in firing those 9 US Attorneys? You say its illegal so quote, you will have to in a court of law!"

Well, Libs!

[jsgaetano]

Hatch Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939

[TaxDayMan]

Excuse me that law applies to "civil servants" NOT presidential appointments.

READ:"Section 7324 of The Hatch Act provides an exemption to the ban on political activities to:

(i) an employee paid from an appropriation for the Executive Office of the President; or
(ii) an employee appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, whose position is located within the United States, who determines policies to be pursued by the United States in the nationwide administration of Federal laws."

Such as US Attorneys. Libs, LoL!

[TaxDayMan]

Next?

[Amunaka]

What are you talking about..


Section 502 of the PATRIOT Act reauthorization, which was first drafted in July of 2005 and finally signed in March of 2006, changed the law regarding the appointment of U.S. Attorneys.

-- by June, they were already moving to replace unwanted prosecutors.

The intent of the law was to ensure continuity of law enforcement when federal prosecutors are lost in terrorist attacks or other crises.

Under it, the attorney general would be permitted to appoint replacements, indefinitely, without Senate confirmation.

What prosecutors have been lost in a terrorist attack or other crises

[Amunaka]

So Why is the PATRIOT ACT Reauthorization Important?

In March of 2006, President Bush signed the USA PATRIOT IMPROVEMENT AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2005. In addition to all of the other contents of this Act, it amended Subsection (c) of Section 546 (the original law is noted above) and eliminated Subsection (d) in its entirety.

Section 502 of HR 109-333 is the relevant section and is reproduced below:

(Snip)

So, basically, what happened here is that (1) the 120 day 'interim' rule was eliminated, and (2) the matter was taken completely out of the hands of the district court. Not only that, but the effect here is that any 'interim' US Attorney can by appointed and can theoretically serve until the end of the appointing President' s term. Additionally, the Attorney General now has the power to appoint an 'interim' US Attorney who can serve, in the immediate case, until the end of 2008.

What this does, in effect, is allow the Attorney General to appoint anyone so long as the appointee was not previously submitted and refused by the Senate.

Once again, the powers of the Legislative Branch are being stripped from the process and shifted to the Executive Branch. Further, this is currently being questioned as potentially unconstitutional in that it is delegating the authority to make such appointments from the President (under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution) to the Attorney General.

http://www.epluribusmedia.org/features/2007/20070130_gonzales_appointments.html

[TaxDayMan]

This Act, a federal law means Bush administration acted LEGALLY in any case. Libs LoL!

[cravingtruthiness]

if he didn't violate any laws why need Exec Priv to not testify? why not just testify instead of skirting the subpoena for years? hmmmmmm....

i don't know of any honest, legal action that needs to be hidden so much - why are you trying to cover for fascist, dictatorial actions taxday-otherwise known as K.K. Karl's buttbuddy?

[jsgaetano]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury

Lying to a government official is still a crime, even if you aren't under oath.

[Oldsop]

Most people (except for biased legal techies) do not care about this subject. Why is this even being discussed?

[TaxDayMan]

Because, Libs want to get Karl "I beat you in two presidential elections" Rove! Libs, LoL!

[HowietheScreamer]

At the end of the day, it was Karl that led your party to the utter disaster it's in now. So why do you still kneel before the fat one and suckle?

[Amunaka]

Okay I really don't know why this isn't getting thru....try one more time


wgsalter
approvalpending

Wrong....


"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WHITE HOUSE AND JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
BEGIN U.S. ATTORNEY TRANSITION

3/14/2001

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Continuing the practice of new administrations, President Bush and the Department of Justice have begun the transition process for most of the 93 United States Attorneys.

Attorney General Ashcroft said, 'We are committed to making this an orderly transition to ensure effective, professional law enforcement that reflects the President's priorities.'

... Prior to the beginning of this transition process, nearly one-third of the United States Attorneys had already submitted their resignations. The White House and the Department of Justice have begun to schedule transition dates for most of the remaining United States Attorneys to occur prior to June of this year."


http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2001/March/107ag.htm

[TaxDayMan]

Of course it its getting through it does serve the Libs, LoL! Any more then

"United States Attorneys are appointed by, and serve at the discretion of, the President of the United States, with advice and consent of the United States Senate."

Gets through!

[Amunaka]

Huh...?

In the summary portion of the email, Sampson lays out his recommendation to use a legal loophole to install replacements without Senate confirmation

"I am only in favor of executing on a plan to push some USAs out if we really are ready and willing to put in the time necessary to select candidates and get them appointed -- It will be counterproductive to DOJ operations if we push USAs out and then don't have replacements ready to roll immediately.

*****In addition, I strongly recommend that as a matter of administration, we utilize the new statutory provisions that authorize the AG to make USA appointments.... we can give far less deference to home state senators and thereby get 1.) our preferred person appointed and 2.) do it far faster and more efficiently at less political costs to the White House."*****

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002742.php

[bayviking]

Wipe that smirk off your face, you computerized fraudster.

[judiNJ]

NJ US Attorney Christopher Chistie's name was on that list until he started a bogus investigation of Senator Robert Menendez who was running for the senate in the 2006 election. Luckily, we knew it was bogus and Menendez was elected. Now Christie is running for Governor. I have not forgotten!

[SamEllison]

That's right judi, charges against the future Sen Menendez were bogus and never should have been brought especially during an election.
It has Rove's MO all over it.

[SamEllison]

Why the sunscreen?

[Matthew Benzor 1]

Behind closed doors people what you are witnessing is secrecy that needs to stop we are free country unless it comes to the freemason secret society Elite's like Karl Rove and his buddy the SKULL AND BONES MEN Bush

[kdlaiusa]

Is Rove getting a150 years jail sentence?

[Telemachus]

Sooner or later.

[TaxDayMan]

A liberal wish, LoL!

[ConjureMan]

What's the point? The current Justice Department will do absolutely nothing with the info. Thus, our discovering what took place will just makes us nuts....What a flop Holder(ie Obama) have turned outt o be on this subject.

[Pagoas]

they should've told karl that he was going to be probed years ago if they wanted him to show up.

[Heavy]

JeffGannon would be jealous.

[garymc8]

Will he still be a political pundit FROM JAIL?

[edwcorey]

He has nothing to fear. The DOJ is still a Bush bastion. http://harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005308

[brandnewstuff]

The intentional corruption to aid RUINING THE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISON

[dems08]

Walpin was all the rage in conservative circles, right up until the "controversy" appeared baseless, and White House detractors were forced to move on.

... the Washington Post has published the documents turned over by the Corporation for National and Community Service to a Senate committee reviewing the White House's firing of AmeriCorps IG. Conservatives had charged that the IG, Gerald Walpin, was canned for going too hard after an Obama ally.

We've taken a look through the documents, and it's fair to say they offer a pretty clear picture of how and why the CNCS board lost confidence in Walpin. They jibe closely with what the White House and the board have already said -- to us, among others -- about the deterioration of the relationship between the IG and his agency. And they also make clear that this deterioration had begun long before the Obama administration existed. [...]

The problem is, these folks keep crying "wolf" without thinking it through.

Conservative bloggers and talk-radio hosts are constantly finding scandalous schemes and outrageous abuses relating to the White House.

Some are transparently ridiculous, and some take a few seconds on Google to debunk, but either way, they shout a lot of nonsense. And as a result, it's easy to start ignoring them.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_07/018947.php