Obama Must Render Decision on Rove Wednesday

Image from source, TPMMuckraker

More good news--and reason for hope--for those of us who want to see justice served in the (oldy moldy) contempt of Congress charges against Bush Administration officials. What the House, Senate and President Obama should know is, we'd be happy with one little piggy roasted: Karl Rove. Anything else would be gravy.

[Excerpt]

Judge: Obama Admin Must Weigh In On US Attorneys Fight By Weds

Are things finally coming to a head in the long-running effort to get testimony on the US Attorney firings from key Bush aides?

Read more at: TPMMuckraker

Nancy Pelosi Thinks Prosecution of Bush Officials Possible

Photo from source, Think Progress

Nancy, Nancy, Nancy. I want to believe you. But that whole "impeachment is off the table" malarkey has soured me on your willingness to investigate the truth as it pertains to Bush Administration officials. I'll cross my fingers, but my faith is low.

[Excerpt]

Pelosi foresees prosecution of senior Bush administration officials.

Last month, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said she is open to pursuing investigations of abuses by the Bush Justice Department. “I want to see the truth come forth,” she said. But in a new interview with Rolling Stone, Pelosi went a step further, saying that she believes some senior Bush officials — such as Harriet Miers, Josh Bolten, and Karl Rove — will be prosecuted. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

It's Time for Karl Rove to Go to Jail!

Photo from source, Raw Story

Tell me, please. What would be the downside to citing Karl Rove with contempt of Congress (or inherent contempt), and hauling his chubby butt to jail? Who would complain? There might be some whining from the usual suspects, but who cares? Rove is not a beloved figure, except by the true wingnuts. And he's guilty as sin. . .of many, many things.

[Excerpt]

Rove says he won't comply with congressional subpoenas

Former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove "won't comply" with congressional subpoenas, according to a newspaper report of an event held in Los Angeles earlier this week. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Congressional Committee Holds Karl Rove in Contempt

Photo from source, Raw Story

Frustrating doesn't even begin to describe this story for me. A Congressional committee votes--down party lines--to hold Karl Rove in contempt of Congress. He didn't show up for a Congressional subpoena, and somehow every Republican on the committee thought that was just swell. I'd love to see written arguments.

Anyway, Rove is guilty of much, probably much more than we're aware of. And they finally have him dead to rights, and he's probably going to get away with it anyway. I understand it's an election year, and Democrats don't want to rock the boat. But how many Democrats would be energized by seeing Democratic leaders grow a spine? I'm thinking quite a few. . .

[Excerpt]

Judiciary Committee approves resolution holding Rove in contempt of Congress

The House Judiciary Committee has voted 20-14 to approve a contempt of Congress resolution against former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove for his failure to appear after a Congressional subpoena.

Voting along party lines Wednesday morning, the committee said Rove broke the law by failing to appear at a July 10 hearing on allegations of White House influence over the Justice Department, including whether Rove encouraged prosecutions against Democrats. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

What Do You Think of Karl Rove?

Conservatives, at least the active type who post on sites like Free Republic, love Karl Rove. They enthusiastically refer to him as "the architect," and "Rove, you magnificent bastard!" People on the other side of the aisle are more likely to call him "Turd Blossom" (the President's unusually apt nickname for him), or a variety of off-color phrases. Most of us would like nothing better than to see him frog-marched out of the FOX "News" studios in shackles.

There seems to be nothing Karl Rove can do, however unethical or illegal to shake many conservatives' positive views of his results. He wins for them. That seems to be all that matters. When Democrats speak of "change," this is what we're talking about. A change from "winning" at any cost.

Brave New Films: Send Karl Rove to Jail

If you've ever read this blog, it will not surprise you to find that I simply could not resist posting a video entitled Send Karl Rove to Jail. I only wish more people felt the same way.

Send Karl Rove to Jail

Karl Rove Still a No-Show. . .Except on TV

Photo from source, LA Times

Five days ago, Congress gave Karl Rove five more days to appear before them, as ordered by Congressional subpoena. Nobody expected him to do it, of course, because Bush Administration officials are apparently immune from the rule of law. Unless Congress gave him five business days, though, his five days are up. And so far--though I may have missed it--I haven't seen much about it.

If Karl Rove (and Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers) are let off the hook for this, it seems to me that this is the straw that breaks the camel's back as it applies to Congressional power. They'll have shown that they have none. Do you suppose that they're just hoping for a Democratic administration, and that they won't need the power? I can't quite figure it out. But I really wish hour Congress would just collectively grow a set. Yes, Nancy Pelosi too.

[Excerpt]

Karl Rove snubs Congress but gabs with TV critics

He may be snubbing Congress, dismissing a congressional subpoena as just another scrap of paper caught in the war between the White House and a House committee over executive privilege.

But former White House aide Karl Rove, now a Fox News analyst, wasn't too proud to be a prop for Fox News in a Q-and-A session the network laid on Monday at the Television Critics Assn.'s summer press tour in Beverly Hills. On a panel that also included Fox analyst Howard Wolfson, a former acolyte of Hillary Clinton, Rove opined aplenty. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

Rove Refuses to Testify; Conyers Gives Him TIME?

Photo from PhotoBucket

This blog makes no pretense at being "fair and balanced," though I do think I'm generally fair. But since I'm not a journalist, I don't have to be objective. So I can say Karl Rove is an obnoxious pig. What's more, I can prove it!

Rove has been subpoenaed by Congress. He was supposed to appear before a Congressional panel today. And he just didn't show up. Because he's an obnoxious pig. There, see? Anyway, I'm really, really hoping to have the picture in this post come true. And while I'm trying to give Congressman John Conyers the benefit of the doubt, I am not encouraged by a further extension given to Rove to give him one last chance. . .

[Excerpt]

Rove refuses subpoena, leaves country

Update: Conyers gives Rove 5 days to comply before pursuing 'all available options'

Former White House adviser Karl Rove has ignored a subpoena from congressional Democrats to testify about allegations of political pressure at the Justice Department and his alleged role in the prosecution of a former governor of Alabama. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Arianna Huffington on Karl Rove and Executive Privilege

Photo from source, Huffington Post

There is a lot in this article that is worth a read. I wish I had something to add that would be as elequent as what Arianna Huffington has to say here about Karl Rove, but I'm not as talented as she is. So I'll just be me. He's a pig. How's that?

[Excerpt]

Karl Rove's Contempt for the Constitution and the Public's Right to Know

Karl Rove ain't coming. And he ain't talking. Except on Fox News.
Despite being subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee to testify on his role in politicizing the Justice Department -- and in using the Department to selectively prosecute Democratic officials -- the erstwhile Boy Genius has announced that he won't be showing up at tomorrow's scheduled hearing. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Waxman Threatening Attorney General with Contempt

Photo from source, Raw Story

As well he should. Why is it that members of the Bush Administration seem to think that they're exempt from the law? If Congress compels you to appear before them, you shouldn't just be able to say, "nahhh." You go, and if you think you're within your rights not to testify, then you give your reasons. You don't get to pick and choose what laws apply to you.

[Excerpt]

Waxman threatens AG with contempt unless he gets FBI's Cheney transcripts

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) says his committee will vote next week to hold Attorney General Michael Mukasey in contempt if the Bush appointee continues to refuse to hand over transcripts of an FBI interview with Vice President Dick Cheney. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

More on John Conyers and Karl Rove

Photo from source, Raw Story

Slowly (way too slowly for me), Congressman John Conyers has been tightening the screws on Karl Rove. He's a slippery critter (for some reason, a greased pig comes to mind), so let's hope he gets those lock-tight screws!

[Excerpt]

Conyers: Rove must testify or risk contempt

. . ."We want to make clear that the Subcommittee will convene as scheduled and expects Mr. Rove to appear, and that a refusal to appear in violation of the subpoena could subject Mr. Rove to contempt proceedings, including statutory contempt under federal law and proceedings under the inherent contempt authority of the House of Representatives," wrote Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-CA) and Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-CA), chair of an administrative law subcommittee.. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Karl Rove Subpoenaed!!! Frog-march Clock Starts

Photo from source, Raw Story

I've been covering Congressman John Conyers' attempts to question Karl Rove for some time. And I've long held a dream that Rove be held accountable for his many, many crimes against America. All while Rove quietly slunk out of the White House, and over to FOX "News" (essentially a job transfer), to become a highly lauded (by FOXbots) political commentator.

There is frankly to much sleaze to wade through about Rove, if you don't know much about him. Go to the library and borrow Bush's Brain, which will bring you up to speed. Suffice it to say, liberals who follow politics, like me, would rather see Rove skewered than just about any other Bush Administration member, with the possible exceptions of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush himself.

Go get him, Mr. Conyers, you're our only hope!

[Excerpt]

Conyers subpoenas Karl Rove over Justice Department scandal

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) issued a subpoena Thursday to former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove for testimony about politicization of the Department of Justice (DOJ), including the case of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, who was jailed for bribery in what was widely seen as a political prosecution. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Wexler on Dan Abrams regarding Rove and Inherent Contempt

Posting a video is undoubtedly easier for me to do than to type a long explanation of a news item. Saves me time in formatting too. But it also can be so much easier for you the reader to absorb. This piece, from MSNBC's The Verdict with Dan Abrams is an outstanding primer on the whole Karl Rove/Don Siegelman/Congressional subpoena/inherent contempt story. It's good.

Oh, and I really can't stand Karl Rove. He's guilty of so much, if this is what gets him, so be it. Rant over.

Democrats Start Contempt Trial, Recall Watergate

Photo from Medal of Freedom

I've had something of a crummy day, and political news hasn't improved my mood. . .until now. THIS lifts my spirits! Go get 'em guys. And if this doesn't work, I will paraphrase Dolly Parton's Doralee Rhodes from 9 to 5: "Well I say we hire a couple of wranglers to go up there and beat the shit out of 'em!" Works for me.

[Excerpt]

Dems invoke Watergate in contempt trial

President Bush's refusal to let two confidants provide information to Congress about fired federal prosecutors represents the most expansive view of executive privilege since Watergate, the House Judiciary Committee told a federal judge Thursday. [snip]

"Not since the days of Watergate have the Congress and the federal courts been confronted with such an expansive view of executive privilege as the one asserted by the current presidential administration and the individual defendants in this case," according to the House's filing. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

House Files Suit for Contempt by Miers, Bolten

Photo from source, New York Times

Can I get a woo-hoo? In a rare move, Congress did not drop the ball, and followed through with their threat to file suit. If they hadn't, any future Congressional subpoenas would be effectively meaningless. The White House, of course, is balking. But tell me, if they've got nothing to hide, what are they afraid of? Isn't that the line they're using on us, regarding domestic spying?

[Excerpt]

Panel Asks Judge to Rule in Contempt Case

The confrontation between the White House and Congressional Democrats escalated on Monday as the House Judiciary Committee asked a federal judge to force Harriet E. Miers, former White House counsel, and Joshua B. Bolten, White House chief of staff, to provide information about the dismissals of federal prosecutors in 2007. . .

Read more at: New York Times

Florida Rep. Wexler Explains Contempt of Congress

Sometimes political fights--even those we feel passionate about--can come across as petty, boring or confusing to other people. News media often plays up only one angle or one side of an issue, or they might just largely ignore the whole story. If you throw in right-wing radio, which might be painting the story as inconsequential, or just the whining of the opposition, it becomes very difficult to get people to sit still and listen to why an issue might be worth their time.

Among the many things that have outraged me about the Bush administration, the two I know and care the most about--the fight over telecoms, and the contempt of Congress of the Bush Administration--are both unsexy, and difficult to get people to sit still for. That's why I like this video, by Rep. Robert Wexler (R-FL), regarding the latter of my two pet issues. In a relatively short video, he spells out the importance of the issue, using just enough words to explain the issue without causing drowsiness.



If you care about the issue of this Imperial Presidency and their unchecked power, and have that one person (or persons!) who you are trying to sway, show them this video. Maybe you'll get them on board.

And by the way, good on you Rep. Wexler! Your state needs a champion for justice, and so does this country.

Attorney General Refuses Contempt Citations

Photo from TPM Muckraker

The "rule of law" party--as Republicans like to refer to themselves--is officially a farce, if it wasn't already. Attorney General Michael Mukasey has refused to order a Grand Jury on the contempt of Congress citations against Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers.

The case is pretty straightforward. Bolten and Miers were subpoenaed to appear before Congress. They ignored the subpoenas, and simply didn't show up. That's contempt of Congress, pure and simple. They claimed "executive privilege," but plainly are not President or even Vice President (and even Dick Cheney claims to be apart from the Executive Branch).

Mukasey's argument seems to hinge on the fact that George W. Bush told them not to go, so it's OK. WHAT? This stinks on ice, and I'm not only hoping, but imploring Nancy Pelosi to take this as far as she can.

[Excerpt]

Mukasey refuses probe of Bush aides

Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused Friday to refer the House's contempt citations against two of President Bush's top aides to a federal grand jury. Mukasey said White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former presidential counsel Harriet Miers committed no crime.

As promised, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that she has given the Judiciary Committee authority to file a lawsuit against Bolten and Miers in federal court. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Nancy Pelosi Wants Grand Jury for Bolton, Miers

Photo from source, CNN

Yay!

[Excerpt]

House speaker seeks grand jury probe of 2 Bush aides

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday requested that a federal grand jury be appointed to investigate whether a top White House official and former official should be prosecuted for contempt of Congress. . .

Read more at: CNN

John Conyers on Restoring the Constitution

Photo from Raw Story

I just got a letter from Congressman John Conyers, and I had to share it on the blog. Of all the Bush administration scandals, the straw that broke the camel's back for me was the Contempt of Congress of Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten (and Karl Rove, but we may have to wait a while longer for the great white whale). It was just galling that they could thumb their noses so brazenly at Congress, as though working in the Executive Branch insulates you from the rule of law.

So I covered the developments in this case yesterday (here, here and here), and I'm now featuring Conyers' personal account of the situation. Conyers is helping to restore my faith in Congress. Sure, my balloon could be popped, but right now it's still rising.

[Excerpt from letter]

"As the morning's papers covered this story, many of them recount the Judiciary Committee investigation that began a year ago. They talk of the fired U.S. Attorneys who testified, the thousands of pages of documents produced by the Department of Justice, and of the subpoenas ignored by the White House.

I hope that as you read those stories, you will remember that the path to today's contempt vote did not begin with just a subpoena, or a hearing, or even the firings in December, 2006."

Read the entire letter by clicking the link after CONTINUED.

John Conyers' Letter

A Good Day for the Constitution

Yesterday the House of Representatives took several historic steps towards protecting our system of checks and balances. First, by a vote of 223 to 32, the House passed resolutions referring criminal contempt citations for former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, as well as authorizing civil actions against them should the Justice Department refuse to prosecute. Second, we did not succumb to the White House political pressure concerning the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Yesterday's contempt vote upheld the simple Constitutional principle that no one is above the law. If an ordinary citizen could not ignore a subpoena without facing severe consequences, the same must hold true for the White House.

As the morning's papers covered this story, many of them recount the Judiciary Committee investigation that began a year ago. They talk of the fired U.S. Attorneys who testified, the thousands of pages of documents produced by the Department of Justice, and of the subpoenas ignored by the White House.

I hope that as you read those stories, you will remember that the path to today's contempt vote did not begin with just a subpoena, or a hearing, or even the firings in December, 2006. Rather, it began with the Bush Administration's politicization of Justice and its refusal to submit to congressional oversight. I commend my 232 colleagues who joined me in voting to hold the Bush White house accountable and who stood up for the rule of law.

I also want to commend the Democratic Leadership for standing up to the White House yesterday and refusing to succumb to political pressure concerning the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Last August we allowed ourselves to be jammed by the Senate and the White House. Yesterday, we stood up in the face of the pressure and let the President know that we intend to do our jobs as legislators and not hastily pass the flawed Senate bill with retroactive legal immunity for the telecommunications firms.

The White House, of course, has complained bitterly about the contempt vote as they have with many oversight actions Congress has taken. I have linked to some articles that show breadth of this bluster.

Much more remains to be done, but this week, we made real progress. With your help, we all made a difference, and the nation and our constitution are stronger for it. Thank you.

Thank you again for your continued support for a better democracy.

Your Friend, John Conyers, Jr.

More on Contempt of Congress Vote

Photo from source, Raw Story

Yes, this is three posts in a row on the same subject, but in the first of the bunch I used FOX "News" as a source. I think it's probably necessary to get a second source on the story, and Raw Story is always one of my favorites on political news.

Besides, I am politically invigorated by this story. It has been sooo long since we've had what appears to be so in line with what I've been hoping for from Congress. And it should be a no-lose issue. If Congress issues a subpoena for you to appear, you can't just say, "Oh really, I would go, but, I just don't feel like it. Sorry." It doesn't work that way! And what power would future Congressional subpoenas have if there was a loophole like that? So, I'm crossing my fingers, and hoping this is all as good as it appears to be.

[Excerpt]

House passes contempt citations for Bush aides

Republican walk-out to protest vote

Democrats passed contempt of Congress citations against two Bush administration figures Thursday after the charges had spent months in limbo.

On a vote of 223-to-32 House Democrats succeeded in passing the contempt charges against White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former counsel Harriet Miers, after Republicans walked out in protest. [snip]

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer took the floor to rebut Boehner's actions, chastising the Republicans for voting en mass against a measure to give the House more time to work on updating the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. And he took aim at President Bush for trying to stoke national security fears to force quick action from the House. . .

Read more (it's good) at: Raw Story