In what is now an almost mocking level of contempt, Karl Rove has refused to appear before Congress despite a subpoena to do so. While claiming executive privilege, there is no justification for the failure to appear and to answer any questions on the firing of U.S. attorneys. The question is what will the Democratic Congress do beyond expressions of outrage. It is a question that I will discuss on the Dan Abrams show tonight.
Rove is claiming immunity despite the fact that there are obvious many questions that could not possibly be covered by executive privilege. He was first subpoenaed in May. Committee Chair John Conyers and Subcommittee Chairperson Linda Sanchez have already rejected the claim and threatened prosecution. However, Attorney General Mukasey has blocked giving the case to the grand jury. That leaves Congress’ inherent contempt authority, discussed here.
Congress stopped holding contempt trials after the Justice Department insisted that it would be represent the institution in court. With the open effort to protect officials by Mukasey, Congress now must choose between using its inherent authority or to accept open contempt of its authority.
For today’s story, click here.
Bartebee,
Why would Rove flee the country if he hasn’t done anything wrong?? Why doesn’t he agree to testify, under oath, in front of Congress if he has nothing to hide? Maybe Russ can tell us why his buddy Karl Rove has fled.
Bartlebee: Your claim lacks substance. There has not even been a contempt vote in the full House yet. That may not occur, if it ever does, for another two or more weeks.
Rove is acting under the advice of attorneys far more versed in law than Mr. Turley, who is all conjecture, opinion, and no substance either.
Sorry russ, my last post was for you as well.
😐
When you’re back from replacing your smashed keyboard, lemme know.
Why do you think Rove “FLED” the Country today?
If you don’t know, I’ll be glad to tell you.
He FLED THE COUNTRY today, because unlike most of us here, he actually thinks Congresses testicles may drop sometime over the next 48 hours, and send the Sergeant at Arms to come arrest him, and drag him off in handcuffs to sit and think a while in the basement of the capital.
And since Mr Bush is in enough trouble already, he clearly doesn’t wish to get into more by trying to bail out the Turdblossom.
So Bush ain’t tossing him an oar this time.
Because he knows theres ZERO….. lemme say that again….. ZERO foundations here for invocation of Executive Privilege.
Rove’s going to have to paddle his way out of this one, on his own, so rather than take the chance, Rove did what ALL CRIMINALS do, and took flight.
Michael Spindell: Absolutely correct. This poster Russ doesn’t understand the purpose and legal effect of the separation of powers nor does he understand the totally different concept of executive privilege and the test for its application.
His preposterous comment about Professor Turley’s incompetence, does nothing more than expose Russ’s own pure ignorance and his stunning willingness to display it. His dedication to the Puppet Bush and his thugs marks him as a slack-jawed Dupe easily the prey of the ultraRight propagandists who send him off to cheer and vote against his own interests.
russ
1, July 10, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Even the biased slanted to the left off the world jonathan turley KNOWS that executive privilage exists and separation of powers exists.
————–
Sure does.
Unfortunately it doesn’t exist for private citizens.
Like Karl Rove.
😐
Also, unfortunately for your argument, and for Mr Rove, President Bush has not invoked executive privilege for the Turdblossom in this case.
😐
Also, unfortunately, for your argument, and for Mr Rove, the courts have already ruled that Executive Privilege applies ONLY in a few, special circumstances, like matters of National Security, and Intelligence.
NOT in helping Turdblossom stay out of jail for screwing around with the Justice Dept.
Got any other Red Herrings you’d like to serve up there Sparky?
Actually, go check the documents. Rove (well, Bush) did NOT invoke EP. See this post:
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/07/10/bush-did-not-invoke-executive-privilege-for-rove/
Neither the Fielding letter nor yesterday’s letter from Luskin even mentions EP–and the memo rationalizing the whole thing–written last year for the USA purge–doesn’t either. This is solely a claim of Absolute Immunity, and not a claim of EP at all. (Note, in a letter, last week, Luskin used the phrase–but that was before he had official notice from the WH what to do.)
Much more interesting than the fact that this was NOT an EP claim, though, is that the White House Counsel has now asserted that witch hunts against high profile Democrats–or whatever it is that Rove was doing in AL–were part of Karl Rove’s official duties at the White House.
Stew on the implications of that for a while.
russ
1, July 10, 2008 at 7:16 pm
SUSAN: Certainly YOU understand the importance of separation of powers in our government even if Jonathan Turley PRETENDS not to. Can you imagine any president trying to function if every day Congress could subpeona his aides and put them under oath as to what the president had said or done the previous day?
————–
Yea, sounds like it’d be rough… russ.
😐
Good thing thats not what they’re doing, huh?
My only question at this point, is what country would have him?
Bob
1, July 10, 2008 at 5:06 pm
How hard could be to just issue an arrest warrant? Isn’t that what happens when you or I fail to appear in court?
——-
Not hard, if they had one single spine among them. Just watch the congresswoman on right now, on Dan Abrams, (actually, Jonathan Turley’s on now) hem and haw when asked if he should be arrested.
Here’s her…. “uhhh….. well… uhhhhh”.
As Professor Turley so clearly stated to David, (before David abruptly cut him off to bring on the talking partisan heads), its NOT that far fetched to order an arrest warrant for Rove.
But clearly these congressional leaders are interested only in pomp and show. Otherwise, why would the answer be, when Dave asked the congresswoman when they’d be holding the contempt hearing, “gee, I don’t know, maybe in 3 or 4 weeks”..? (paraphrased).
Meanwhile, while Congress sits on its hands and wonders why Karl Rove won’t just play nice, Karl Rove has fled the country.
Thats right.
Karl Rove, has fled the United States, supposedly on a “planned vacation trip”.
Problem is, if it was planned, then why didn’t his attorney inform the congress?
“It is called Separation of Powers. He does not have to respond to it! The House Judiciary Committee can go blow smoke.
The White House does not answer to the House of Representatives. That has been the law of the land for 200 + years and if it ever got to the Supreme Court the House knows the Supreme Court would agree with the President.”
****
Not so – he does have to ‘Answer’ ie appear – even if he refuses to
actually answer certain questions.
This is, in effect, what ‘separation of powers’ means, Michael.
His is a ‘possible’ argument AND not a persuasive one at that, in my view.
I say Rove loses, hands down, which is probably why he won’t risk showing up – ever, if he can avoid it!
Michael Spindell,
Russ is just trolling with multiple and repetitive postings with little or no facts behind them. Your tutorial on the Separation of Powers was excellent. I think Russ just may be an alias for Martha H., Niblet and others.
“It is called Separation of Powers. He does not have to respond to it! The House Judiciary Committee can go blow smoke.
The White House does not answer to the House of Representatives. That has been the law of the land for 200 + years and if it ever got to the Supreme Court the House knows the Supreme Court would agree with the President.”
Russ,
you are a true fan of Bush as typified by your rash of comments, mostly repetitive and inaccurate. Separation of Powers grants no inherent right of executive privilege and in fact gives Congress the power to investigate. Which is done by hearings, for which people are compelled to testify.
Where your fandom becomes apparent is in the repetition of statements lacking truth, but by the action of repetition somehow are transmogrified into reality (at least in your mind). Goebbel’s take on this was what he called “The Big Lie.” Your problem is that you view your citizenship from a perspective similar to that of a football fan. The success of your team somehow equates into your manhood. Their success, their power, makes you feel powerful, when inside you probably just feel scared, but like “a brave little boy who’s afraid to cry.”
You’re afraid to express your fears and you cover them with seemingly tough rhetoric. Didn’t you learn in the schoolyard that the toughest people never had to prove it? I wasn’t afraid of the tough guys on the schoolyard because they didn’t have anything to prove by beating me up. It was the bullies and their gangs that I’d have to watch for because they thought a fair fight was ganging up on someone. Sound familiar.
I’m sure Scooter needed your $30 badly. You sadly look at people like Bush and Cheney as tough guys because they are so loud in proclaiming they are tough. If they were so tough though, how come Bush joined the Air National Guard (which everybody during the Viet Nam War knew was the place for rich kids who didn’t want to fights) and Cheney simply said he had better things to do and had a baby?
Unless somehow you’re a rich guy whose got it made, it’s really time for you to realize that your “heroes” are screwing you and the rest of the country along with you. It’s time to join the Team that really is patriotic, really can protect the country, really does honor our troops and really can make the lives of its citizens better. That Team is really America’s Team. Hint: Bush, Cheney and McCain aren’t on it.
SUSAN: Certainly YOU understand the importance of separation of powers in our government even if Jonathan Turley PRETENDS not to. Can you imagine any president trying to function if every day Congress could subpeona his aides and put them under oath as to what the president had said or done the previous day?
Even the biased slanted to the left off the world jonathan turley KNOWS that executive privilage exists and separation of powers exists. Jonathan Turley ALSO knows that nobody in Congress wants to push this issue to the Supreme Court because they know the court would rule FOR THE PRESIDENT ON executive privilage and separation of powers.
Susan: did you COMPLAIN this much when CLINTON routinely ignored Congressiona Subpeonas?
I thought Rove wasn’t even employed by the White House anymore. So how does HE avoid a just and deserved prosecution for CRIMINAL CONTEMPT? How can Rove claim “Executive Privilege” when he (to the best of my knowledge) is NOT part of the Executive Branch? Doesn’t his leaving (he DID leave, didn’t he?) make him an ordinary citizen now, just like the rest of us? If that is the case, he should have been arrested and tossed into JAIL, isn’t that correct?
Hey JT: Is there going to be some BALANCE ON MSNBC TONIGHT OR JUST YOU SPOUTING YOUR LEFT WING BELIEFS?
Tell ABRAMS he is a COWARD if he does not have an opposing VIEWPOINT alongside you to debate the issue like Oreilly does! I guess you all are so insecure in your positions.
It is called Separation of Powers. He does not have to respond to it! The House Judiciary Committee can go blow smoke.
The White House does not answer to the House of Representatives. That has been the law of the land for 200 + years and if it ever got to the Supreme Court the House knows the Supreme Court would agree with the President. That is why these subpeonas have historically been ignored.
This is political posturing to make it look like he had a responsibility to answer an unenforceable subpoena……..and some are falling for it, including the 1 percenters here that SHOULD KNOW BETTER!
PS: The Special Prosecutor determined there was no law broken relating to Valery Wilson. Unfortunately for Scooter it looked like some of his answers were evasive but nothing more.
I sent him $30 towards his defense costs but I bet you didn’t…………..right?
God Bless President Bush.
It is called Separation of Powers. He does not have to respond to it! The House Judiciary Committee can go blow smoke.
The White House does not answer to the House of Representatives. That has been the law of the land for 200 + years and if it ever got to the Supreme Court the House knows the Supreme Court would agree with the President. That is why these subpeonas have historically been ignored.
This is political posturing to make it look like he had a responsibility to answer an unenforceable subpoena……..and some are falling for it, including the 1 percenters here that SHOULD KNOW BETTER!
PS: The Special Prosecutor determined there was no law broken relating to Valery Wilson. Unfortunately for Scooter it looked like some of his answers were evasive but nothing more.
I sent him $30 towards his defense costs but I bet you didn’t…………..right?
God Bless President Bush.
Note: This was the fourth time the Clinton Administration asserted executive privilege in response to demands from Congress.
Note: This was the fourth time the Clinton Administration asserted executive privilege in response to demands from Congress.
September 17, 1999
Clinton Refuses Subpoena For Material on Clemency
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Citing separation of powers & executive privilege, President Clinton today rejected subpoenas from Congressional Republicans to turn over records of private deliberations that led him to offer clemency last month to 16 members of a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group.
”Pursuant to the Constitution and the separation of powers doctrine, the President’s authority to grant clemency is not subject to legislative oversight,” Cheryl Mills, the White House deputy counsel, wrote to Representative Dan Burton, the Indiana Republican who is chairman of the Committee on Government Reform. On Sept. 1, the committee issued subpoenas to the White House and the Justice Department seeking all interagency communications and other records relating to the President’s decision.
Ms. Mills also said the White House was spurning the committee’s subpoena for Beth Nolan, the President’s new chief counsel, to testify on the matter. But Administration officials said tonight that three other officials would appear next week at the panel’s hearings, although they would not testify to matters considered confidential.
This was the fourth time the Clinton Administration asserted executive privilege in response to demands from Congress.
September 17, 1999
Clinton Refuses Subpoena For Material on Clemency
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Citing separation of powers & executive privilege, President Clinton today rejected subpoenas from Congressional Republicans to turn over records of private deliberations that led him to offer clemency last month to 16 members of a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group.
”Pursuant to the Constitution and the separation of powers doctrine, the President’s authority to grant clemency is not subject to legislative oversight,” Cheryl Mills, the White House deputy counsel, wrote to Representative Dan Burton, the Indiana Republican who is chairman of the Committee on Government Reform. On Sept. 1, the committee issued subpoenas to the White House and the Justice Department seeking all interagency communications and other records relating to the President’s decision.
Ms. Mills also said the White House was spurning the committee’s subpoena for Beth Nolan, the President’s new chief counsel, to testify on the matter. But Administration officials said tonight that three other officials would appear next week at the panel’s hearings, although they would not testify to matters considered confidential.
This was the fourth time the Clinton Administration asserted executive privilege in response to demands from Congress.