Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

House subpoenas Karl Rove over US Attorney firings, political prosecutions

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babsbunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 05:38 PM
Original message
House subpoenas Karl Rove over US Attorney firings, political prosecutions
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CONYERS_SUBPOENAS_KARL_ROVE_0126.html

John Byrne
Published: Monday January 26, 2009


Invoking President Barack Obama, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) has subpoenaed former Bush Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove about his alleged involved in the political prosecution of an Alabama governor and the firings of nine US Attorneys.

The subpoena, approved by an earlier vote of the House, was issued pursuant to "authority granted in H.R. 5 (111th Congress), and calls for Mr. Rove to appear at deposition on Monday, February 2, 2009."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
1. While he's there, ask Rove about violations of the Hatch Act...for bending
policy to help republican officials get elected in various states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. he is not bound by the Hatch Act
as the President's adviser, but he broke the law with regard to witness tampering, abuses of power, and obstruction of justice...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. Do I have my Acts mixed up? Isn't it illegal for him to have made presentations
to interior department employees, letting them know which projects should move forward in order to politically benefit the republican officials from that area (allegedly)? Thought for sure there was a dust up about this....

...will look into what I'm thinking about. If you have links that would be great...

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 11:28 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. it is not for him
John Dean said this to me on the record that the Hatch act does not apply to Rove. His staff, however, and staffers at departments would be limited by the Hatch act (argh, don't remember which article... ). I will try to guess which one and look around for the exact quote from Dean
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. What happens when Rove blows it off? Anything different? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. yes... the US Marshalls have been instructed
to pick him up... its in the article... woooooooo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneGrassRoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Yay!!! Thanks for all you do, lala. :) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. my pleasure...
but especially today:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneGrassRoot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. No doubt, how gratifying!!!! :)
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. that's not correct
you must know that that's not what the article says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. "The subpoena delegates authority to US marshals to enforce,
like any Congressional subpoena, and was copied to Rove's Washington, D.C. attorney, Robert Luskin."

From the link in the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. right... translated into
simply: US Marshalls will cuff him if he does not show
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. this is the power of real
journalism and grassroots demanding justice!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihatehannity Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
6. yet again, a hannity croney doing dirty work
Fox news needs to be shut down, so many people hannity associates himself with are bad people.
... i don't even want to get started on this rant...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Commie Pinko Dirtbag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-09 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #6
22. FAIL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
7. When he refuses or no show, will Department of Justice grab his soft juicy body?
I would settle to the House Sargent of Arms to hit in the head with the ceremonial mace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. Significant paragraph in the article: the lack of new AG may be play a role.
snip>

This is the second time Conyers has subpoenaed Rove. It's uncertain whether Rove will be compelled to testify, as Obama's attorney general has not yet been confirmed.

snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. Whether he's forced to testify or not
Is more important than anything he might say. It the White House doesn't have to respond to subpoenas, we'll have a dictatorship.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
11. I have a feeling that Karl may be a bit more uneasy this time than last. Just sayin'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
15. Not too exciting, its just for a deposition
Also interesting to note that it was faxed to his attorney "by agreement" vice formal service.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dccrossman Donating Member (530 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
16. Brought an involuntary smile to my face
Just read this on HuffPo and I just started smiling...

Oh Karl, its a new day. Nobody is going to be watching your back now. Presidential Privilege, my ass.

C'mon Conyers, welcome Mr Rove to the real world.

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-26-09 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
19. Go to jail. Go directly to jail Do not pass Go, Do not collect $200. Go directly to jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC