Reply With Quote
So what does this mean? Is it symbolic, or will he soon be the reluctant love interest of a burly gentleman with whom he shares a small, enclosed space?
Karl Rove Held In Contempt By House Judiciary Committee
WASHINGTON — A House panel Wednesday voted to cite former top White House aide Karl Rove for contempt of Congress as its Senate counterpart explored punishment for alleged Bush administration misdeeds.
Voting 20-14 along party lines, the House Judiciary Committee said that Rove had broken 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 such as former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.
The committee decision is only a recommendation, and a spokesman for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she would not decide until September whether to bring it to a final vote.
With little more than three months before Election Day, it wasn't clear whether majority Democrats could take any substantial action in a political environment in which time for the current Congress is running short and lawmakers face a host of daunting legislative problems and a cluttered calendar.
The House committee vote occurred as members of the Senate Judiciary Committee delved into allegations of wrongdoing ranging from discriminating against liberals at Justice to ignoring subpoenas and lying to Congress.
For his part, Rove has denied any involvement with Justice decisions, and the White House has said Congress has no authority to compel testimony from current and former advisers. His attorney, Robert Luskin, had urged the panel in letter not to vote for a citation, calling it a "gratuitously punitive" action that would serve no purpose because the question of executive privilege is already pending in two other cases in federal court.
Republicans who unanimously opposed the measure accused Democrats of staging political theater.
"Instead of conducting witch hunts, we should consider bipartisan legislation to reduce the price of gas, reduce crime and secure the borders," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the top panel Republican.
But Democrats cited recent internal audits finding that politics heavily shaped Justice Department hiring, and they said that Rove had left them with no choice but to support a contempt citation.
"His name has come up repeatedly in the hearings on this subject," said Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich. "Yet he refuses to testify based on legally invalid claims of immunity privilege."
The Senate proceedings were the latest congressional review of the White House, a cons utionally mandated power that majority Democrats are eager to use. Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine, who reported this week that former department officials broke the law by letting administration politics dictate the hiring of prosecutors, immigration judges and career government lawyers, Fine said his office and Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility are investigating.
He said specifically that they're trying to determine whether Bradley Schlozman, former head of the department's Civil Rights Division, used political or ideological criteria to make hiring decisions.
Under questioning by Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel's senior Republican, Fine said he uncovered no evidence that any Justice officials involved made false statements to Congress or violated criminal law. Politicization of the hiring process for career positions is a violation of civil law and department policy, he said.
The Senate probe sprang from Justice's firings of nine federal prosecutors that sparked congressional investigations last year and led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
House and Senate Democrats said the findings of Justice's IG's office affirmed their contention that career employees there were hired and fired based on whether they were deemed sufficiently conservative, a violation of law. Conyers said earlier that he was considering bringing criminal charges against some of the former officials named in Fine's report who may have lied to his committee. Lying to Congress is a crime, but there's little agreement among Democrats on whether a perjury referral against some of the officials is warranted.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who led the investigation into the prosecutor firings, is pressing Fine to say whether making such a disregard of civil service rules a crime would deter the kind of conduct his investigation uncovered.
Similar legislation will be considered in the House.
"I will be asking Chairman Conyers to consider legislation to ensure that the politicization of hiring of career employees at the Justice Department never happens again," Pelosi said in a statement.
___
Associated Press Writer Ben Evans contributed to this story.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_115836.html
So what does this mean? Is it symbolic, or will he soon be the reluctant love interest of a burly gentleman with whom he shares a small, enclosed space?
In case anybody is wondering, I am pro-Karl Rove getting prison raped.
Kharma has a way of making such things happen to those making such wishes.
Enjoy.
@ 14 assholes saying he didn't break the law.
he won't go to prison, he won't pay a penny out of his own pocket, Repug donors will cover everything. Dems have no balls.
Word is, they won't do anything until Bush is out of office, knowing full well what it going to happen (and has already happened) with Scooter Libby, vis a vis commutations and pardons.
God I hope your right... Rove is a piece of
I'm not responsible for ruining people's lives. Karl Rove is going to get what he deserves. Jesse Helms, Tony Snow, Robert Novak, then Ted Stevens. Rove is goinng to get his. It's about to be open season on Republican hawks.
but......if mccain is elected.....it will be interesting to see what he would do with the guy that ass ed him in 2000.
That's not what your parents said.
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Good point. Rove's fingerprints were all over a lot of the nastiness that got Bush past McCain the primaries. I am sure there is no love lost between the two.
Not that I like Rove or anything, but "Contempt of Congress" is bull . Congress is not the Judiciary, able to decide guilt or innocence, and Congress is not the Executive, able to enforce laws.
It's idiotic. That pisses me off as much as the Supreme Court basically legislating from the bench by repeatedly widening their authority basing it off precedent set by thier previous decisions.
Apparently, it's not "bull ":
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102305
There's no way out of it for him anymore.
He has to go before Congress.
Contempt of Congress is bull .
I'm assuming your link refers to the judge upholding the subpoenas, which is a different issue than a contempt of congress charge.
If a judge ruled they can issue subpoenas and they refuse to show up, then they can be held in contempt.
They can be CHARGED with contempt. Congress declares them guilty.
I'd be interested in hearing examples of this phenomenon and not just hot rhetoric suggesting that it has happened.
Charging someone with contempt is not the equivalent of finding them guilty of a crime. If anything holding someone in contempt is simply a conclusion that the person failed to comply with an order from that body, be it judicial or legislative. The consequence of a contempt finding is a penalty that is imposed only for so long as the contemnor refuses to comply -- once the contemnor has complied, there is no longer a penalty.
Beat me to it.
Fine. If they desrve it, Kharma will catch up with them at some point. My point is that to wish evil upon others is to invite it upon yourself.
Oh...
I do believe Rove et.al. may be innocent of all these allegations anyway. The left has a way of lying you know. I have not yet seen any convincing evidence of your allegations.
Are you an Obamunist?
None of those allagations are as bad as what drove Obama to the senate.
Ever hear how he eliminated the compe uion?
GOP congressional member thinks throwing Rove in jail is a good idea...
Think ProgressYesterday, the House Judiciary Committee voted to hold Karl Rove in contempt of Congress. On MSNBC yesterday, Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), breaking with his party, said he believes Rove should be forced to testify. “Let him explain his involvement, if any, in this Don Siegelman case.” When pressed on whether he was suggesting sending Rove to jail, Jones signaled that he supports this option:
Q: Knowing that he’s not coming, should Congress use its inherent contempt power and haul him in, possibly put him into jail?
JONES: Whatever authority Congress has, we need to uphold the ins ution.
Q: So it sounds like you’re saying that you too think that that should be a real option here.
JONES: I think that we should uphold the ins ution and the integrity of the House of Representatives.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
