Paging Karl Rove: U.S. District Judge Sides With Congress
Word has just come down the wire that a U.S. District Judge, John Bates, has sided with with Congress in its effort to get Bush administration aides to appear before congressional committees.
Just yesterday, Karl Rove, who has thus far avoided testifying by all manner of clever schemes, from citing the White House's desire to stand up for the executive branch to being conveniently out of the country, dismissed the Judiciary Committee's contempt recommendation as "ludicrous." Today, he continues his inexorable slide toward actually having to show up on Congress' doorstep.
Couple things to consider here. First, in the immediate moments after the news report went out on the web, initial reactions on the blogs, particularly among the more cynical liberals out there in the blogosphere, was to wonder when the judge who ruled on this would be smeared, tarnished, destroyed, sent to Gitmo, etc. But that will be very difficult for the Bush administration to do, as John Bates was appointed to his office by, yes, the Bush administration. In fact, Bates is the very same judge who tossed out Valerie Plame's lawsuit against Dick Cheney -- hardly a liberal partisan, then.
The second thing to remember in this time of Rovian woe: There's going to be a lot of talk about "Bush's Brain" in the coming days, a lot of talk about the man's brilliant political mind. I'd like everyone to remember the current position of the Republican Party (read: slightly more popular than cancer.), and recall that Rove's tactics of firing up the right-wing base while ignoring moderates has played a large part in the GOP's current sad state. Remember that, if you remember nothing else about the man: Karl Rove is, in the long-run, a colossal failure. His bad run in politics could only end this way.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
C'mon folks, just think P-R-E-S-I-
unfortunately you are correct...
I hope they are biding their time until 1/20/09.
you do remember that Nixon was pardoned before he was convicted of anything ....
You miss the point - Bush and Cheyney have walled themselves in behind the bastions of Executive Power and Priviledge. If one brick can be chiseled from that wall then chances are the bricks are all so interdependant that the wall will crumble. Rove is not the target, he's a battering ram (as is Miers). Cheyney is the ultimate target; the éminence grise who employs his unfettered power without Executive supervision.
The Dems are not leading the attack - they are too invested in maintaining the status quo and are lackadaisically following protocol. They fear the truth could discredit and devalue the executive office - the same office they anticipate holding in the very near future.
Regardless of the decision, it must be remembered Bush and company are above the law.
In the end, the Democrats will not pursue the issue. Bush and his criminals have made untold Billions for their friends in the Arms and Oil industries. Nothing but lies for 7 years. Why would anyone expect anything different ?
With "leaders" like Impeachement off the Table Pelosi, nobody really expects anything to become of this.
Rove will walk.
And to think Judge Bates was put on the bench by George W. Must be one of those strict constitutionalists they talk so much about.
Seeing this criminal chortle at us on FOX News just bothers me. But the law and the Congress have to intervene more to stop the Bush machine from halting prosecution. I don't want just a slap on the hand for Rove and others.
Whether or not he is ever brought to justice, Sweeney's point is an excellent one -- the current state of the GOP is proof that Rove is not the political genious they thought he was. In fact, the strategies and tactics he orchestrated have brought the Republican Party to the brink of ruin. (Not that I'm complaining . . . )
I think it proves that Karl Rove is good at WINNING (however dirty he has to play), but clearly not so hot on the GOVERNING (see everything that's happened since 2000 as proof).
I hope he get's dragged into the committee room kicking and screaming.
Just another speedbump. Wait for the appeal.
If he ever does appear, he will probably plead the 5th Amendment as not to incriminate himeself as to Criminal charges per the advice of his legal counsel and claim 'Executive Privilege' and 'National Security' per White House orders. That should tie up things until GWB give him a blanket pardon. By then his testimony will be too late for Congress to work on.
One thing about a pardon, though, is that the person has to be convicted of a crime or plead guilty to a crime before a pardon can be given.
Ford pardoned Nixon without a guilty plea or a conviction.
I'd like to see anyone who isn't a high-level political operative ignore Congress' subpoena and call the resulting contempt citation ludicrous.
Arrest him already!
So, if I am ever subpoenaed, can I just tell them I am playing by Rove rules, and then not show up?
It would surely go along way in restoring some of my faith in Congress and in our judicial system if this rodent is finally brought to justice. I really hope Rove goes to prison.
They'll just show up and take the fifth. It will be a one day story and then the media will be off like hamsters on meth looking for evidence of Obama looking presumptuous because...
Exactly,
In this case Rove wouldn't even have to plead the fifth. He can still claim executive privilege, the judge did not deny that. The ruling (as I understand it) is that executive privilege does not protect you from having to appear, however it might protect you from having to say anything once you are there.
The whole thing is dumb, though.
I think that, no matter who you are, the proper response whenever congress subpoenas you is to ask for immunity from any prosecution that might result from the testimony. If immunity is not granted then the proper thing for any American citizen to do is to plead the fifth.
Maybe you all are more trusting of congress than me, but I'd say no good could come from talking to those guys. Especially not if they have indicated that they are out to get someone.
Congress is not the judicial branch and therefore has no business trying to prosecute criminals. And if they are truly just wanting information then they will get the most accurate information if they grant immunity.
It is all stupid political gamesmanship here, not real business of government.
Sadly, we have seen this before with the confirmation process for the current Attorney General, the "interrogation" of the fomer Attorney General and many more times.
One of my favorites is the Senate Banking Committee's hearings with the heads of the credit card operations at Chase, Bank of America and Citibank. A question was asked about late and penalty fees. One of the bankers responded "I don't have that information with me". The Senator said in effect "OK well nevermind".
It's best not to go into a game of wits with only half of your own.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
