It Is Time To Arrest Karl Rove For Contempt of Congress.

[tekisui]

He must be held in contempt and arrested, or Congress will be revealed as a toothless sham. How can he be allowed to give Conyers and the American people the finger, yet again, without consequence.

If I am ever subpoenaed, I will claim the roveth and not show. Wonder hoe that would work out.

[Demeter]

1. It's PAST Time for Some BushCo Arrests

What's holding us up here?

[orleans]

40. um...obama?

Obama Admin Backs Bushies On Missing Emails
Change we can believe in? Maybe not so much.

The Obama administration is siding with the Bush administration in trying to kill a lawsuit brought by watchdog groups that seeks to gain access to Bush White House emails, reports the Associated Press.

At issue are emails from key periods of the Bush years, including the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, and the investigation into the Valerie Plame leak.

In response to the suit brought by two groups, CREW and the National Security Archive, the Bush White House recently said that it had found 14 million of the e-mails and had taken steps to archive others. But the plaintiffs called those steps inadequate.

Now the Obama Justice Department is seeking to have the suit dismissed, just as the Bush DOJ did.

"The new administration seems no more eager than the last" to deal with the issue, Anne Weismann of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, told the Associated Press.

The AP adds:


Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive, noted that President Barack Obama on his first full day in office called for greater transparency in government.

The Justice Department "apparently never got the message" from Obama, Blanton said.


Sounds about right.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/obama_admin_backs_bushies_on_missing_emails.php

letting bush get away with murder sends a hopeful message to kkkarl

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x275634

[laylah]

78. He's just asking for time

to sort this sh*t out...your problem is???????????????

[orleans]

87. who said i had a problem? obviously you've got the "problem" on the brain...

[Royal Sloan 09]

2. K & R,

What's the point of having laws? As the Repugs choose what laws they will follow, or so it appears. WTF!

[oldtime dfl_er]

3. Exactly

It's up to us, the American people, to make sure the law is followed. Rove thinks he's above it, but he's NOT.

[jody]

4. Does Obama support subpoenaing Rove? If yes he should order his U.S. Marshals to bring Rove in. n/t

[tekisui]

5. He said rove didn't have immunity on this. It isn't up to Obama, but Conyer and

Congress to send the Sergeant at Arms to get him for contempt.

[jody]

6. Does Obama need you to apologize for his inaction?The Sergeant at Arms has trivial authority

compared to Obama's U.S. Marshals.

[tekisui]

7. I don't know that it would be constitutional for Obama to send

Marshals to get rove for failing to appear in Congress.

[jody]

11. Then Conyers needs to find out. Is it possible that Conyers and Obama cut a deal so that Conyers

continues to bluff and bluster knowing that Rove will ignore the Sergeant at Arms and Obama will not use his U.S. Marshals?

[tekisui]

12. I hope not, and I doubt it.

I think Obama is resigned to let it play out through Congress and any investigating Holder does. He isn't really wanted to get involved one way or the other. I think Conyers wants justice. He will have to get Congress to vote that rove is indeed in contempt. Once that is done, rove can be arrested.

[jody]

13. Conyers is not doing his job, that's all! n/t

[hootinholler]

19. Um, no.

If you think the Sgt At Arms authority is trivial, then you should look into it. The only power they do not have is the ability to deputize.

For them to act, the congress needs a vote of inherent contempt, which is not the statutory contempt that Rove was charged with last year.

The Marshals would need a warrant to go get him, which could be obtained easily enough given there are already contempt charges referred to the DOJ.

-Hoot

[jody]

21. Suggest you read "Congress’s Contempt Power" below.

Congress’s Contempt Power: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure

[hootinholler]

27. I'm sorry, but how does a CRS pdf on Contempt support your assertion

That the Sgt At Arms authority is trivial compared to the U.S. Marshals? I fail to see the connection.

Oh and thanks for the PDF bomb.

-Hoot

[jody]

49. Apparently you did not read the report. Have a nice day. n/t

[hootinholler]

53. Well excuse me for not jumping on your string and diving into a 65 page report...

I did look it over, I even searched for marshal, which doesn't appear in the report in the context of the U.S. Marshals Office.

So, then I asked you to point out where the report supports your assertion that the Sgt At Arms has less authority than the Marshals Office. Really, I'd like to know what the relevant bits of the report are.

Have the day you deserve.

-Hoot

[jody]

55. Re: "Have the day you deserve" -- I will have a wonderful day! n/t

[MADem]

82. Could you possibly cut and paste the relevant passages?

It's helpful for people who don't have adobe installed or who have slow computers/connections.

[jody]

89. I asserted “The Sergeant at Arms has trivial authority” in the context of compelling Rove to obey

a House subcommittee subpoena. ON EDIT ADD: "See #5 above."

The House Sergeant at Arms’ authority is derived from the authority of the House and cannot exceed that authority.

Regarding enforcement of a House subcommittee subpoena, the passages below are from Congress’s Contempt Power: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure.

Following that, I include extracts from the “RULES of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS” and a link to “House Sergeant at Arms: Fact Sheet on Legislative and Administrative Duties”.

Summary
Congress’s contempt power is the means by which Congress responds to certain acts that in its view obstruct the legislative process. Contempt may be used either to coerce compliance (inherent contempt), punish the contemnor (criminal contempt), and/or to remove the obstruction (civil contempt). Although arguably any action that directly obstructs the effort of Congress to exercise its constitutional powers may constitute a contempt, in the last seventy years the contempt power (primarily through the criminal contempt process) has generally been employed only in instances of refusals of witnesses to appear before committees, to respond to questions, or to produce documents.

This report examines the source of the contempt power, reviews the historical development of the early case law, outlines the statutory and common law basis for Congress’s contempt power, and analyzes the procedures associated with each of the three different types of contempt proceedings. In addition, the report discusses limitations both nonconstitutional and constitutionally based on the power. Finally, the report discusses the recent investigation by the House Judiciary Committee that has resulted in votes for criminal contempt of Congress and the filing of a civil lawsuit to enforce congressional subpoenas.{page 1}

Civil Contempt in the House of Representatives. While the House of Representatives cannot pursue actions under the Senate’s civil contempt statute discussed above, there are numerous examples of the House, by resolution, affording special investigatory committees authority not ordinarily available to its standing committees. Such special panels have often been vested with staff deposition authority, and given the particular circumstances, special panels have also been vested with the authority to obtain tax information, as well as the authority to seek international assistance in information gathering efforts abroad.222 In addition, several special panels have been specifically granted the authority to seek judicial orders and participate in judicial proceedings.{page 40}

Although, as indicated, prior to the 110th Congress, there have been no previous attempts by a House of Congress to seek civil enforcement of subpoenas in federal court authorized solely by resolution of a single House,264 there have been situations that appear to be closely analogous. On several occasions the House of Representatives has authorized, via House Resolution, the intervention by counsel representing a House Committee into civil litigation involving congressional subpoenas.{page 46}

As neither AT&T, Ashland Oil, nor In Re Beef raised any questions regarding the jurisdiction of the federal courts, it appears possible to argue that all that is legally required for committees, the House General Counsel, or a House-retained private counsel to seek civil enforcement of subpoenas or other orders is that authorization be granted by resolution of the full House. Absent such authorization, it appears that the courts will not entertain civil motions of any kind on behalf of Congress or its committees. While some may still argue that a law passed by both Houses and signed by the President conferring jurisdiction is required, it may be plausibly argued that taken together, the combination of Reed’s requirement that congressional authorization to sue be by express language, the willingness of federal courts to accept properly authorized interventions, and the fact that the federal question jurisdiction statute no longer contains an amount in controversy requirement, suggest that if an authorization resolution by the House can be obtained there is a likelihood that a reviewing court will find no legal impediment to seeking civil enforcement of subpoenas or other committee orders.{page 48}

RULES of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

Power to sit and act; subpoena power
(m)(1) For the purpose of carrying out any of its functions and duties under this rule and rule X (including any matters referred to it under clause 2 of rule XII), a committee or subcommittee is authorized (subject to subparagraph (3)(A))—

* * * * * * * * * * * *

(B) to require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and documents as it considers necessary.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

(3)(A)(i) Except as provided in subdivision (A)(ii), a subpoena may be authorized
and issued by a committee or subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) in the conduct of an investigation or series of investigations or activities only when authorized by the committee or subcommittee, a majority being present. The power to authorize and issue subpoenas under subparagraph (1)(B) may be delegated to the chair of the committee under such rules and under such limitations as the committee may prescribe. Authorized subpoenas shall be signed by the chair of the committee or by a member designated by the committee.

(ii) In the case of a subcommittee of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, a subpoena may be authorized and issued only by an affirmative vote of a majority of its members.

(B) A subpoena duces tecum may specify terms of return other than at a meeting or hearing of the committee or subcommittee authorizing the subpoena.

(C) Compliance with a subpoena issued by a committee or subcommittee under subparagraph (1)(B) may be enforced only as authorized or directed by the House.

House Sergeant at Arms: Fact Sheet on Legislative and Administrative Duties

[Enrique]

22. no, he hasn't decided yet

the court has been asking Obama whether he agrees with Bush's position, and he keeps saying he needs more time. The deadline is coming up soon.

[tekisui]

32. You're right.

When are we suppose to get the ruling? The 24th? It seems like that was the date.

[tekisui]

52. The new date for the Obama Administration Ruling is March 4th.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today gave the Obama administration another week to decide its course in a case involving one of President George W. Bush’s most expansive claims of executive privilege.

The briefing schedule has changed three times in the last two weeks, after two motions by the Justice Department for more time to allow for an out-of-court settlement in the House of Representatives' lawsuit against former White House counsel Harriet Miers and chief of staff Joshua Bolten. The Justice Department now has until March 4 to file its opening brief in the case.

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/02/court-gives-obama-an-extention-in-subpoena-case.html

[dkofos]

8. It's way past time. Conyers should have done it the first time.

[SIMPLYB1980]

9. Yep it's way past time. nt

[rucognizant]

51. You betcha!

I'm blowing $53. per month I don't have keeping my DIrect TV on so I can watch ROve's hearing ! Wish they'd nab him!
There is certainly not much to warrent $53. All those religious & shopping channels and so many ESPAN channels showing worthless steroid junkies, while the figure skating has been shifted to Oxygen which costs more per month! BAH HUMBUG. Not to mention the cynical stooopid commercials!

[burythehatchet]

10. Good thing we have a Dem administration now.

[leftofthedial]

14. Gee.

Ya think?

[riderinthestorm]

15. What exactly can Congress do if Rove is held in contempt?

Can they simply send the Sgt at Arms to arrest him, and jail him? If he is to be jailed, where is he jailed?

Do the charges get referred to Holder? Does that mean federal marshals would be required to arrest Rove? Again, where would he be held?

I was under the impression that Rove was voted in contempt by the last Congress, charges were referred to the AG who declined to act on arresting Rove. So nothing happened. Which leads me to believe Congress has no actual authority.

Anyone know the exact procedures here, and who has what authority?

[SIMPLYB1980]

16. I belive the next step is Inherent contempt.

I'm not sure but I think we have been dealing with regular old contempt and inherent contempt is required for an arrest by the Sgt at Arms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress#Inherent_contempt

[Xithras]

26. Inherent Contempt has been dead since the 1930's.

Inherent Contempt involves dragging the person before the chamber for a trial directly by the chamber. It was abandoned in favor of Statutory Contempt because it rarely worked. An Inherent Contempt charge requires the chamber to clear all business and deal only with that subpoena, and then any trial can be derailed by one filibustering dissenter. Because it requires the full camber and displaces other business, that gives the dissenter the power to effectively shut the chamber down for all business until the matter is dropped. NO legislation can pass while the trial is underway. It doesn't work, which is why the system was replaced in the 1870's. It's last use in the 1930's was an ugly mess, and while it's still technically on the books, nobody has touched it since.

[Xithras]

25. No, Congress has no actual authority.

Here's what has to happen for anyone to actually be punished for this sort of thing.

1) The committee would have to find the person in contempt and refer it to the full wing of Congress it reports to.
2) The full chamber must vote to find the person in contempt.
3) Congress refers it to the AG's office.
4) The AG's office must hand it to a grand jury to determine whether the contempt charge is actually actionable (e.g., that some harm came of it).
5) If the grand jury finds cause, a federal indictment can be issued.
6) A federal trial would occur, awarding a maximum penalty of one year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

There has never been a case in U.S. history where failing to testify has reached #6.

The Supreme Court has also declared that a persons 5th Amendment protections are a justifiable reason for failing to appear before Congress. All Rove has to do is say "I plead the 5th" and those six steps will no longer apply to him...Congress will lose all power to question or punish him.

[Supersedeas]

35. then the focus should be on the Attorney General

[DUlover2909]

46. Where does he plead the 5th though?

Can he plead the 5th out on the street, or after he's sworn in before Congress?

[Xithras]

81. I believe that he simply has to notify Congress

A simple letter to the committee declaring that he won't appear because doing so may violate his "constitutional protections" should be all that's required.

By the way, no lawyer would ever tell a client to "plead the fifth" nowadays. The proper line is, "Answering your questions may lead to a violation of my rights and constitutional protections."

That's all it takes to dodge Congress.

[JPettus]

39. Actually

I vote in favor of extraordinary rendition.

[GOTV]

67. Congress has lathered, they've rinsed. I believe the next step is repeat ...

... and I'm afriad that's the best we're gonna get out of that spineless bunch.

[liam_laddie]

17. K & R!!!

Phuckin' A RIGHT!
No more stern letters, Rep. Conyers. Call the Capitol Police and ARREST the slimebag. NOW!

[wroberts189]

18. If they do not it certainly sets a precedent doesn't it? knr nt

[earth mom]

20. ALL of them have given ALL of us the finger. Not just Rove & * & Co. But Congress too.

Those bastards are going to get away with murder and Congress has blood on their hands too. :grr:

[donco6]

23. Congress is a toothless sham.

Rove has done this what? Three times already?

[barbtries]

24. agreed.

one hundred percent. that fucking pig.

[Zhade]

28. Indeed.

K/R

[bdamomma]

29. They need to arrest this guy.

justice needs to make an appearance.

[October]

30. Don't you feel like Rove is laughing because he knows they won't create a stink?

He is just rubbing the Dems' noses in this.

[bdamomma]

31. Congress needs a spine.

[October]

34. So true.

I know that not everyone "here" is a Rahm fan -- but I sure like the fight in him.

[zagging]

33. It's more like Contempt of Conyers

How much support is he getting?

[lala_rawraw]

36. they are not going to...

i am working on this story, but it will make your blood boil

[tekisui]

72. It's boiling!

:grr:

It is clear that there are two classes of citizens. Those who must follow the law, and those who can break it without consequence.

[flyarm]

83. But don't worry..Congress has investigated Baseball players

and steriods...

I just wonder when the last baseball players started a war based on lies..covered up 9/11 and all the lies surrounding that, destroyed our judicial branch of government..and stole our votes and incarcerated people for political reasons alone..

ahh never mind......

Conyers will do nothing..

and Mitchell got out of the country fast after blowing a ballplayers confidentiality agreement for testing..see Obama sent him to the middle east along with KISSINGER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my favorite war criminal!

[lala_rawraw]

88. i am of the opinion

that if the social-government contract (the laws and their enforcement) does not apply to a single individual, then that contract is no longer binding for any individual. if Rove does not honor a subp., and not be held to account for that, then no one else has to honor a court order or Congressional order. we are either a nation of laws or we are no longer a democracy.

[suede1]

37. Way past time!

[byronius]

38. Error: You've already recommended that thread.

[salin]

41. Agreed.

k & r.

[bridgit]

42. I don't know let me think about it HELL yes!

[Indi Guy]

43. Since When Did the Rule of Law Become a Gray Area???...

:shrug:

[Iwillnevergiveup]

44. It boggles the mind

when you think about how quickly and unceremoniously the attorneys were fired and Don Siegelman (sp?) was jailed.

[Enthusiast]

45. Yeah, I'm tired of saying it.

I tire of signing petitions to have Rove arrested. WTF?

[deacon]

47. Obama, Congress MUST restore the rule of law, period. No excuses, this must be dealt with. n/t

[OnionPatch]

48. Didn't you know? Supoenas are only for us "little people."

You don't really expect a member of the political neocon royalty to follow the rules like the rest of us, do you?

[florida08]

50. agreed

Rove was suppose to appear at 10 am on the 23rd. He didn't show.
Former Bush adviser Karl Rove was a no-show today at his scheduled deposition deadline for the House Judiciary Committee's ongoing probe into the U.S. attorney firings -- setting up a major decision for President Obama on how to respond to congressional subpoenas.

White House Counsel Greg Craig has urged the two sides to cut a deal, but Rove and his attorney, Robert Luskin, have kicked it back to the White House, saying it is up to them to assert executive privilege or not.

So the next big development will occur on March 4, when the Obama administration is scheduled to file a motion in federal appeals court laying out its position on the issue.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0209/Rove_skips_House_Judiciary_deposition.html

Watch this closely..it will decide all the issues coming down the pike on investigations imho.

[The Wizard]

57. Congress' lack of ability

to hold offenders accountable invites lynch mob rule, not that I would mind seeing the bloated Nazi left for vulture fare.

[nc4bo]

54. This is why things never change.

What incentive do any of these people have to respect the Constitution and abide by the laws of common man and country.

Bad deeds go unpunished, laws routinely broken with no fear of punishment and all of it flaunted. What message does that send?! :wtf: is wrong with this country?!!

[catrose]

56. ditto WAY past time n/t

[The Wizard]

58. Contact your representatives

and let them know strongly worded letters are insufficient in the defense of democracy. We demand equal justice under the law.

[GOTV]

68. Better yet - contact your neighbors ...

... congress doesn't act because there is insufficient pressure on them to act.

[serbbral]

59. Karl Rove!

Boy, I want his ass in jail!

[Harmonika]

60. Just hunt him down

and put an end to all this bullshit.

[bdamomma]

61. instead of three times you're out, not Karl Rove.

filthy SOB, call your Reps and John Conyers office.

[mod mom]

62. We need to demand rule of law for everyone from the Obama Administration. Rove MUST

face justice!

[pipi_k]

63. I kind of suspected

when he was subpoenaed to appear before Congress that this would happen.

Or else he'd go but suddenly have huge lapses of memory. :eyes:



Yeah, we all know what should be done, but I'm not holding my breath.


Someone pointed out in another thread the other day that much of what occurs in DC is political theater. I agree. Americans have their own 24/7 Reality Shows. And I'm just cynical enough to believe that the reason Congress haven't gone in with warrants and handcuffs to arrest these slimebags is because many of them (yes, even Democrats!) might also have been involved in the crimes.

They certainly can't claim political impotence NOW!


It's all a big show to them, and it does appear at times that they're playing to an audience that boos and hisses but keeps on buying the tickets to the next show...

[NMMOM]

64. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW!!

Boy this really pisses me off. :mad:

[Crabby Appleton]

65. Na na na na NAH na

[valerief]

66. I wonder who is being threatened with what or who is benefitting from what

to keep Rove from being arrested.

[Wapsie B]

69. That's my question as well.

Someone has a gun to their heads.

[valerief]

73. That's what I figured the Iraq War was all about, too. Offers they couldn't refuse. nt

[spanone]

70. what an effective government we have

one man can tell congress to go fuck itself


:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[AlexDeLarge]

71. Yo, Congress

Uh, Doy!

[AtomicKitten]

74. Enough is enough. The Democrats need to back up their impotent bark and BITE! n/t

[florida08]

75. I know it's frustrating

but in all fairness if President Obama challenges Rove's 'executive privilege' then it weakens his own in the event a republican wins the next election. As we all know republicans would have no problem bring Obama's aides before congress if there was even a hint of anything they could use against him. Obama has not 'challenged' it yet but he hasn't supported it either. Rove is not intimidated in the least and is forcing the new president's hand. I don't see Obama supporting it. Before becoming president he criticized the assertion that presidential advisors have "absolute immunity" to refuse to appear before Congress.

Rove was forced to testify in the case Fitzgerald brought so we know he doesn't have "absolute immunity." The House should go ahead and issue the 'contempt of congress' citation and begin proceedings. Judge Bates slammed the Bush White House for attempting to obstruct and overrule congress by asserting such an expansion of executive power which as no constitutional basis. Force Rove to appear and let him claim the 5th which will have to be litigated perhaps all the way to the Supreme Court. It could take years.
Make Rove pay for all this circus stalling he is doing.

[JDPriestly]

76. Face it. Obama doesn't want to have to arrest Rove

at this moment. It would be inconvenient to excite partisan rancor. Obama wants to focus on the future and not the past. Remember?

We will never get justice with regard to the Bush administration from the Obama administration. Obama is too keen on building a coalition.

Not until a Rove meets crowds of several thousand protesters at a ll his partisan speeches will Obama make a move -- and then it will no doubt be to arrest the protesters. Obama does not like confrontation. He needs to be liked. That is Obama's weakness (we all have at least one), and Rove knows it. So why should Rove worry?

[flvegan]

77. I wish that the spine wasn't optional equipment for many of our dem reps.

[GreenTea]

79. We keep demanding this, yet Congress doesn't seem to give a shit, or is Congress simply afraid to

exert it's power because the democrats in Congress are scared shitless of the big tough minority republicans & their media machine?

Is it because Congress is really just playing an image game, pretending to be tough for it's constituency?

Or is Congress first waiting for court judgments to be handed down concerning the appeals by (former Bush advisers) Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers?

No matter what the reason, Congress certainly has the right and the power to arrest the lying, diabolical, evil, pig-faced weasel Rove for contempt of court charges!

ARREST ROVE NOW!!

[orbitalman]

80. Time to squish the "blosoming" TURD

[98Beatsies]

84. It's time to once and for all end the politics of Karl Rove

...we need to preserve our democracy

[Kurovski]

85. K&R (nt)

[galloglas]

86. It is way PAST time !! N/T