Bush expected to claim executive privilege on Rove

[sabra]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush is expected to claim executive privilege to prevent two more White House aides from testifying before Congress about the firings of federal prosecutors.

Thursday is the deadline for Karl Rove, Bush’s top political adviser, to provide testimony and documents related to the firings, under a subpoena from the Senate Judiciary Committee. Also subpoenaed was White House political aide J. Scott Jennings. The Justice Department included both men on e-mails about the firings and the administration’s response to the congressional investigation.

White House Counsel Fred Fielding has consistently said that top presidential aides– present and past — are immune from subpoenas and has declared the documents sought off-limits under executive privilege.

The House Judiciary Committee already has approved a contempt citation against two other Bush confidants, chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers. The full House is expected to vote on the citation in the fall, but the Justice Department has said it won’t prosecute the two.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/08/01/bush-expected-to-claim-executive-privilege-on-rove/

[Cha]

1. Maybe we should just Impeach

the ugly sonava ugly bitch! And then indict his, executive priveleged, ass.

[dubyaD40web]

2. No, he will claim executive privilege over that too.

[Bitwit1234]

20. You know something...rove is bush's political advisor

so, the firing of the attornys was not supposed to be political. So how in the hell can bush claim executive privlege and national security or anything about that. BECAUSE ROVE should not have had anything what so ever to do with the firing of the attorneys. That was not his job....

[lame54]

24. i'm with you

IMPEACH already - watch this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Hr8k8WHTzN0

[Cha]

27. Hey, you're not so lame!

Welcome to DU!

[Fluffdaddy]

3. Is there nothing we can do?

I just about ready to give up an say the hell with it til the next election :(

[pdefalla]

4. Nothing we can do?

That's exactly what they want. They are attempting to wear us down with obfuscation, delays, stonewalling, technicalities, parliamentary chicanery, and invocation of spurious and inappropriate rules and conventions (i.e. "executive privilege"). They seem to have and inexhaustible supply of excuses, and are fighting to the bitter end because their political lives depend on it. But the end is coming, and they know it. They can only postpone it, and we have the opportunity to hasten it.
DO NOT GIVE UP! Do not relax the pressure, rather, work to expose and publicize their lies and their crimes. Soon, a tipping point will be reached, just like with Viet Nam, just like with Watergate. They will be toppled, believe it. I have moments of frustration and doubt too, but I also have DU, thank God. We will win this one, you and I and all the other you and I's.

[Doctor_J]

6. IOW, there's nothing we can do

:shrug:

[dmosh42]

7. In a way, they are doing......

Lately, I'm seeing more people who never took sides on this, making statements like yours. And this includes Republicans. We all know that the Constitution was not meant to be used as an ass-wipe whenever these crooks want a way to cover up. There seems to be events every week where the Executive branch has to trot out their mouthpieces to explain the reason for secrecy, and avoiding the hearings. The pressure is mounting, and woe to that Republican judge who obstructs the wishes of the public! Keep the hearings going!

[Lerkfish]

8. hell, yeah, we can impeach. oh wait, that's right, the DLC doesn't want the I word

[ProudDad]

9. Don't worry

the Senate and House are doing what they can...

More subpoenas, more contempt citations, etc.

That worked in '74 should work now...

[alllyingwhores]

28. The F___ing DLC didn't exist in 74!--can you say TR--ANG-U-LATE?

[ProudDad]

31. No, in '74

we had the dixie-crats and yellow-dog conservative Dems...

The DLC were in the White House in the form of richard nixon...

[The Stranger]

10. What the prior poster said. Cannot impeach because Nancy took it off the table.

Nothing we can do.

[hannah]

35. power

The power is inherent in the people. We need to participate.

[maxrandb]

11. We can hope that enough Republicans care more about

the survival of their political lives than they do about protecting this pretzledent. So far that has not been the case. November obviously didn't send them a strong enough message.

If they (the Republicans) continue to allow Bush to go down this road, they risk letting him do to their party, what Hoover did.

Me? I'm fine with that. I wouldn't mind a bit seeing them at the margins of power for the next 60 years.

[coalition_unwilling]

12. I wouldn't mind seeing them at the margins of power for the next

1,000 years! The world would certainly be grateful.

[niceypoo]

23. The democrats are too timid, so get used to being used as a doormat...

...until 09

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Is "top political adviser" really a protected executive branch position?

I thought Carville stepped down when Clinton took office because his job as "political advisor" was over and the appearance of having one in office would give the appearance of a partisan president.

I guess I was wrong.

[Kagemusha]

14. Actually the excuse is much better with a political advisor than civil servants.

Executive privilege is for people who serve the President specifically, who have no government power themselves but advise the President, who does have such power.

The crazy thing about the "unitary executive" theory is that it seems to seek to transform the entire executive branch into the same status, people who serve the President first and foremost, and who ought not be beholden to Congress or the courts. The main reason why this theory is insane when applied to the Department of Justice is that the DoJ exists because of an act of Congress. Congress tells the President how the DoJ is to be run (through the legislation passed to establish the department), and the President is expected to do it because that's his job. Congressional oversight is merely to ensure that the President is following the task Congress has given him in this matter, as is his sworn duty. But Yoo, Gonzales, Cheney and the gang have improperly turned this principle on its head.

[onehandle]

13. "My Administration is above the Law."

See you in 2009, you little prick.

[niceypoo]

29. "Courtesy of the Congressional Democrats"

[nitestar41]

15. Last sentence Quote from that article....

Pelosi said the president was firm on his stand, but she added, "I'm not one to take no for an answer."

You have to be kidding me... I'm under the impression all she does is take no for an answer... He vetoes she lets it go... he vetoes something else she lets it go...

[Amonester]

34. criminal chimpy doesn't even have to veto, he just issues threats...

to veto, and she lets it go...

[Miss Chybil]

16. "the Justice Department has said it won’t prosecute the two."

Doing a heck of a job, Gonzo.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

17. "Sherlock, No Shit. No Shit, Sherlock."

[graywarrior]

18. Well, I hope someone does "something."

"Something" may be the only way.

[Bitwit1234]

19. We should call the senate investigating committee

and tell them we are not going to be satisfied with anything less than 'INHERENT COMPTEMP' FOR ROVE. We want this turd and no blossom questioned under oath. Fact is we all want him locked up.

[elmerdem]

21. i'm confused

how can dubya claim executive privilege for Rove's conversations w/the doj? We don't care what Rove said to bush just how he directed Kyle Sampson et. al. Maybe a lawyer can explain this, but the way I interpret what the administration is saying is that every person who works for the government (or at least the executive branch) could use executive privilege in this context.

[Prophet 451]

22. IMPEACH THIS MUTHAFUCKER ALREADY!

Investigation has FAILED. The law has FAILED. There is no other option. He ignores Congress, he ignores subpoenas, he ignores reports, he ignores other Republicans and he ignores public feeling. If you hold out any hope of the nation surviving the next eighteen months as a democracy, IMPEACH THIS BASTARD!

[niceypoo]

30. But, but, impeachment is off the table...

...it's a, "time for healing," and being filibustered into irrelevency...

[PoconoPragmatist]

25. Fuck It...Throw Down The Gauntlet!!

subpoena Cheney. and let's see them TRY to claim Executive Privilege on that one!! Because then we can say..."but, Mr. Cheney, I thought you weren't part of the Executive Branch..."

Seriously...fuck 'em, it's time to throw down the gauntlet and leave these fuckers squealin from the feelin!!

[musiclawyer]

26. Showdown coming this fall

At least three people, one of whom is rove will be in contempt. Upon evidence (legal evidecce of no willingness to prosecute by DOJ) Congress has no choice but to impeach or trot out inherent contempt and actually bring all three into custody. It could be very dramatic. I'd love to see inherent contempt played out. But my money is on impeachment actually. I don't think Congress has the balls for inherent contempt. They will simply go for impeachment, which they know will fail, but will at least put the repubs votes on record.

[Imagevision]

32. I'd be content if leahy could finagle a copy of Rove's lost then found emails...

[donkeyotay]

33. We do know Rove was involved in the firing of a select group of attorneys

Even without his testimony and despite executive privilege claims, the mere fact of Rove's involvement points to improper conduct. The repo talking point about US attorneys serving the president's pleasures does not include obstructing justice, does not include interfering in free elections, because that would place the president above the law. Rove is the smoking gun, whether he opens his mouth or not.