What the US Press Won't Say: Leahy and Conyers forced out (pwned) Karl Rove

[alcibiades_mystery]

Karl Rove is out for one reason and one reason only: the Democratic investigations in Congress are fast on his heels, and not letting up. Of course, you won't hear any mention of the political "genius" of Patrick Leahy and John Conyers for taking down the number one target in the Bush Administration. No, there shall be none of that. That would mean that the Democrats actually WON somet5hing, an idea that does not compute in the establishment media mind. But make no mistake. Patrick Leahy and John Conyers OWNED Karl Rove's pasty white ass this year, and sent that little dimwit fucker packing.

[jgraz]

1. Please never

mention KKKarl's pasty white ass again. :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[SpiralHawk]

8. Yes, and also don't mention the republicon THANG with diaper sex

It is altogeher unseemly that the republicons are into -- and applaud -- Diaper Sex,
but there is certainly no need to mention it, especially in the context of
pasty white keesters.

PLEASE DO NOT LOOK AT THIS
ACTUAL DOCUMENTED TRUE ACTION PHOTO OF A REPUBLICON HOMELANDER
IN SEARCH OF PASTY WHITE KEESTER AND MATCHING DIAPERS

[Ghost in the Machine]

12. No 'diaper sex' post is complete without a picture

[sutz12]

2. Maybe so....but Rove might be more dangerous now..working in the shadows. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. Oh stop it

Stop worshipping the guy.

You sound like an imbecile.

[malaise]

11. Agree 100% n/t

Rove lost the 2006 elections despite his predictions. This is a major Democratic victory.

[MADem]

3. I have been saying he quit to spend more time with his defense team. NT

[KittyWampus]

14. your instincts are often correct.

[wryter2000]

5. Fast on his heels

I hope they are. I have all kinds of respect for them, but I'm beginning to wonder what they're waiting for. What happened with the contempt charges?

[Jacobin]

6. He quit to spend more time with his lawyers

No doubt about that

[NavyDavy]

7. Rove is an Idiot period!!!! and a coward!

[L. Coyote]

9. WRONGO, WRONGO, FALSE, NOT TRUE, AIN'T SO, etc.,etc.

What the Press is not saying: Rove is evading punishment for violating the Hatch Act. VERY SIMPLE!
Office of Special Counsel will be unable to take action against Rove once ROVE no longer works for the executive branch.
Rove authored the PowerPoint presentation at issue in the Doan investigation.

Rove will still have to answer to Congress, and he was not canned because of Rep. Conyers or Sen. Leahy. That idea is quite absurd, albeit a good one.

=================================
The Office of Special Counsel, ... Loren Smith, a spokesman for OSC, said Tuesday .... while the Hatch Act investigation will go on, OSC would be unable to take action against any individuals found to be in violation if they no longer work for the executive branch.

"Once a person leaves government service, they are out of our jurisdiction," Smith said.

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?articleid=37737&sid=61

=================================

What constitutes a Hatch Act violation? ANY political activity on USG time, ANY.
It does not matter if it is a dot.gov or rnc.com e-mail if the person is on the clock,
at work in an official capacity. If anything at all is done on a CAMPAIGN it is a
Hatch Act violation. Read ILLEGAL. Read a CRIME. Read getting flushed out of the USG!!

=================================
Rove’s PowerPoint Presentation Revealed During Oversight Hearing
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/28/rove-powerpoint-doan

In January, General Services Administration chief Lurita Doan and Karl Rove deputy Scott Jennings held a video conference with top GSA political appointees, “who discussed ways to help Republican candidates.”

==================================
One way to win elections is to spread the money where it makes certain candidates look really good.
This is a new Republican tactic, and it is the unspoken scandal behind Karl Rove's PPT to the GSA political appointees.

How the 60 billion got spread around, especially the no-bid contracts, needs review
in light of the political tactic of spending the money in ways that benefit specific candidates.

ROVE"S PowerPoint presentation: http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20070328151840-07177.pdf

==================================
Allegations of misconduct at GSA, the Oversight Committee letter to Karl Rove

Following Up on the GSA Hearing

Following yesterday’s hearing regarding allegations of misconduct at GSA, the Oversight Committee has sent a letter to Karl Rove to learn what other agencies received political presentations and whether federal agencies or resources were used to help Republican candidates.

Letter to Karl Rove >> http://oversight.house.gov/Documents/20070329141741-57831.pdf

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=195

...................

... questions were raised about the legality and appropriateness of Mr. Jennings’s presentation and the discussion that followed it. The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service issued an 11-page report that found that both the presentation itself and Ms. Doan’s comments could be violations of the federal Hatch Act. According to CRS, the White House presentation alone may cross the line into being an impermissible “political activity” under the Hatch Act when “the sponsor or presenter is closely affiliated/identified with a partisan political campaign, invitations are directed only to ‘political’ employees of a department, and the objectives and agenda of the program appear to have a partisan slant.”

As part of the Committee’s investigation into Mr. Jennings’s presentation, I ask that you answer the following questions:

* Did you approve of the slides in Mr. Jennings’s presentation? Did you approve of Mr. Jennings’s participation in this meeting?

* Does the White House Office of Political Affairs or the White House Counsel have a policy addressing when and where White House employees can make political presentations such as the one Mr. Jennings gave at GSA headquarters on January 26, 2007? Please explain the legal authority you believe allows you to make such presentations on federal property during business hours.

* Did Mr. Jennings, you, or any other employee of the White House Office of Political Affairs consult with the White House Counsel or the Office of the Special Counsel about whether delivering this presentation to federal government employees in a government building during business hours violated the Hatch Act or any other rules, policies or procedures?

* Have you, Mr. Jennings, or other employees of the White House Office of Political Affairs given this political briefing or any similar briefing mentioning future elections or candidates on other occasions? Please provide the Committee a list of the dates, times, and locations of any of these presentations at which federal officials were present, whether they occurred on federal property or not, as well as a list of the people and organizations who participated.

* Have you, Mr. Jennings, or other employees of the White House Office of Political Affairs provided Mr. Jennings’s PowerPoint presentation or any similar presentation to federal officials mentioning future elections or candidates to people or organizations outside of the White House Office of Political Affairs? Please provide the Committee a list of who received the presentation, as well as the dates, times, and locations the presentation was provided.

* Who prepared the PowerPoint presentation given by Mr. Jennings? Did your office use federal funds to prepare this briefing? If so, please explain the legal authority that you believe allows you to use federal funds to prepare political briefings such as the one Mr. Jennings presented at GSA headquarters on January 26, 2007.

* Why did Mr. Jennings and his staff assistant use private “gwb43.com” accounts rather than their “eop.gov” accounts to correspond with Administrator Doan’s office about the PowerPoint presentation?

In addition, I ask that you provide the Committee with any documents and communications relating to (1) the presentation of the PowerPoint presentation or any similar presentation mentioning future elections or candidates to federal officials and (2) the use of federal agencies or resources to help Republican candidates. ......

Henry A. Waxman
Chairman

[Gregorian]

13. And here I was feeling so good about things.

Actually, I knew he didn't move without a very good plan. This is political chess he's playing. And the game is not over. But I still don't have a sense of doom about it.

I also predicted that his leaving was a means of legal maneuvering in order to facilitate his slipping away from the grasp of justice.

It'll be very interesting to see where this all goes. He still has executive privilege according to John Dean.

[L. Coyote]

20. Expect something from OSC after Sept. 1 on Hatch Act violated.

And, yes, Executive Privilege survives getting canned.

[KittyWampus]

15. Hmm, isn't invoking Executive Priveledge on RNC emails essentially violating the Hatch Act?

[L. Coyote]

19. NO. It is the Presidential Records Act. RNC e-mails were for NOT violating the Hatch Act.

Just the opposite.

[Gregorian]

10. I do not have a sense of doom about this.

I think you're right. Some here are predicting an attack on Iran, and other horrible things. I think Rove leaving was much more indicative of the dam that has just broken.

Republicans can't even tolerate the damage he has done. It's not good for them.

We need some heavy hitters to come forward and deal the knock out punch. Whatever that means. Whatever that is. Probably a long drawn out sequence of legal actions.

[loves_dulcinea]

16. ground and pound!

[Demeter]

17. My Sense of Doom Is Spelled C-H-E-N-E-Y

There's no buffer between Bush and the Big Dick anymore. Only God.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

18. but will they follow up?

So far, Rove has left the White House. No indictment. No barring him getting involved with dirty tricks to make sure a publican is elected in 2008.