consortiumnews.com
New Bush/Rove Privilege Fight Looms
By Jason Leopold
January 27, 2009

George W. Bush is seeking to extend his sweeping concept of executive 
privilege into his post-presidency, with the first battle likely to 
be fought over a renewed demand from House Judiciary Committee 
Chairman John Conyers that Karl Rove finally testify about the 
politicization of the Justice Department.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/Print/2009/012709b.html

On Monday, Conyers reissued a subpoena for Rove, a former White House 
deputy chief of staff, to testify before Congress about his role in 
firing nine federal prosecutors deemed not "loyal Bushies" as well as 
the controversial prosecution of Alabama's former Democratic Gov. Don 
Siegelman.

Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, told the Washington Post that former 
President Bush recently sent a letter to Rove reasserting executive 
privilege that would prevent Rove and possibly other ex-White House 
officials from testifying. It's unknown when Bush sent the letter; 
Luskin did not return calls or respond to e-mails for further comment 
about Bush's letter.

However, it does appear that Bush is determined to extend his broad 
claims of executive privilege beyond his departure from the White 
House on Jan. 20.

In his last years in office, Bush succeeded in frustrating 
congressional inquiries by asserting a sweeping interpretation of 
executive privilege, a tradition that grants some confidentiality 
for advice between the President and his top aides. Bush expanded the 
scope of the privilege to include even discussions among his 
subordinates inside and outside the White House.

In September 2008, U.S. District Judge John Bates rejected Bush's 
position, saying the concept of blanket executive privilege lacked 
legal precedent.

"The Executive cannot identify a single judicial opinion that 
recognizes absolute immunity for senior presidential advisors in this 
or any other context," wrote Bates, a Bush appointee. "In fact, there 
is Supreme Court authority that is all but conclusive on this 
question and that powerfully suggests that such advisors do not enjoy 
absolute immunity."

However, Bush's lawyers appealed Bates's ruling to a 
Republican-dominated Appeals Court panel in Washington that relied on 
a technicality - the looming adjournment of the 110th Congress - to 
declare the issue moot. [See Consortiumnews.com's "GOP Judges Aid 
White House Cover-up."]

At the time, Conyers promised not to let the issue drop, and his 
announcement that he is reissuing the Rove subpoena under the 111th 
Congress indicates the case may soon return to the federal courts.

"I have said many times that I will carry this investigation forward 
to its conclusion, whether in Congress or in court," Conyers said in 
a prepared statement. "Change has come to Washington, and I hope Karl 
Rove is ready for it. After two years of stonewalling, it's time for 
him to talk."

The subpoena demands that Rove appear before Congress for a 
deposition on Feb. 2, at 10 a.m. But it appears unlikely Rove, who 
was considered Bush's political guru, will show up to give testimony 
to the committee.

Conyers's Judiciary Committee also has pursued testimony and 
documents from Bush's last White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and 
former White House Counsel Harriet Miers about their involvement in 
the decision to fire the federal prosecutors. It is believed 
subpoenas will be issued for their testimony as well in the weeks 
ahead.

Rove as Victim

In public comments, Rove has presented himself as the victim of a 
Democratic witch-hunt, particularly after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi 
told Fox News' Chris Wallace two weeks ago that she supported a 
renewed probe into the politicization of the Justice Department.

"I think that we have to learn from the past, and we cannot let the 
politicizing of the - for example, the Justice Department, to go 
unreviewed. Past is prologue. We learn from it," Pelosi said.

Rove, a Fox News contributor, was asked about the exchange and said 
Pelosi was out to get him.

"What do you think she's talking about?" Rove said. "Who do you think 
she was pointing a finger towards? Read carefully the description of 
who she said we ought to be looking at."

Rove's lawyer Luskin argued that Rove and other Bush administration 
officials are protected by an umbrella of executive privilege that 
extends past the end of Bush's term.

"It's generally agreed that former presidents retain executive 
privilege as to matters occurring during their term," Luskin said. 
"We'll solicit the views of the new White House counsel and, if there 
is a disagreement, assume that the matter will be resolved among the 
courts, the President and the former President."

However, President Barack Obama stated during Campaign 2008 that he 
believed Bush was overreaching with his claims of executive 
privilege. On his first full day in office, Obama also signed an 
executive order reining in the power of former presidents to keep 
their historical records secret.

Obama directed the National Archives and Records Administration to 
consult with the Justice Department and White House counsel 
"concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the 
former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the 
presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege."

Theoretically, the standoff could lead to the arrests of Bush 
administration officials who refuse to comply with congressional 
subpoenas, though that practice has not been employed in recent 
times. Traditionally, disputes over executive privilege are resolved 
through negotiations, but Bush's position was so broad that talks 
between Congress and the White House broke down.

Last year, Rove made an end-around against Democratic leaders by 
having his denial of sponsoring Siegelman's prosecution inserted into 
the Congressional Record by Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Judiciary 
Committee's ranking Republican.

In written responses to questions from Smith, Rove denied speaking to 
anyone "either directly or indirectly" at the Justice Department or 
to Alabama state officials about bringing corruption charges against 
Siegelman.

Siegelman was convicted of corruption in 2006, but was released from 
prison on bond in March 2008 after an appeals court ruled that 
"substantial questions" about the case could very well result in a 
new trial or a dismissal.

Siegelman has long maintained that Rove was intimately involved in 
the prosecution and other attempts to blunt Democratic southern 
inroads that Siegelman's governorship represented.

In an interview with The Anniston Star on May 18, 2008, Siegelman 
said Rove first targeted him in 1998.

"It started when Karl Rove's bag man, I call him, Jack Abramoff, 
started putting Indian casino money into Alabama to defeat me in 
1998," Siegelman told the newspaper. "Shortly after I endorsed Al 
Gore in 1999, Karl Rove's client, the attorney general of Alabama 
(Bill Pryor) started an investigation.

"In 2001, Karl Rove's business associate and political partner's 
wife, Leura Canary, became a U.S. Attorney and started a federal 
investigation," Siegelman said. "It started with the attorney general 
and the state investigation, followed by the federal investigation, 
followed by indictments in 2004, and then another series of 
indictments leading up to the 2006 election."

On Monday, several Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee said if 
Rove refuses to comply with the subpoena this time they will urge 
Conyers to have Rove arrested.

Jason Leopold has launched his own Web site, The Public Record, at 
www.pubrecord.org.
To comment at Consortiumblog, click here. (To make a blog comment 
about this or other stories, you can use your normal e-mail address 
and password. Ignore the prompt for a Google account.) To comment to 
us by e-mail, click here. To donate so we can continue reporting and 
publishing stories like the one you just read, click here.
Back to Home Page
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
[email protected] OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to