Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: House panel votes to cite Karl Rove for contempt

  1. #1
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Talking House panel votes to cite Karl Rove for contempt

    House panel votes to cite Rove for contempt
    Associated Press Writer
    A House panel Wednesday voted to cite former top White House aide Karl Rove for contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena to answer questions about the dismissals of several federal prosecutors as its Senate counterpart explored punishments for an array of 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 it was unclear whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., would allow a final vote. 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.
    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 constitutionally 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," Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement.

  2. #2
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    33,488

    Default

    How much you want to bet Pelosi doesn't take a vote? There will be no consequences for anyone in the Bush administration.
    It's no longer a dog whistle, it's a fucking trombone


    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  3. #3
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Unless it's 'inherent contempt' it wont matter. If it's just contempt there are no ramifications. Another useless, spineless ruling that means absolutely nothing.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  4. #4
    Elite Member kingcap72's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    10 miles from Pootie Tang
    Posts
    21,909

    Default

    Yeah, I doubt the Dems will do anything either. They're more concerned with taking back the White House than going after Bush and his cronies. But Rove being held in contempt did put a smile on my face, even though it won't go anywhere.

  5. #5
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    477

    Default

    It is a shame nothing is done to this horrible low-life Rove. If Pelosi doesn't take a vote I hope another Dem runs against her and wins. It's bad enough she would not push for impeachment of Bush.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. House Judiciary Committee subpoenas Karl Rove
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2008, 08:40 AM
  2. White House, Pentagon cite executive privilege to hold up documents on Pat Tillman
    By Born In A Brothel in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 19th, 2007, 11:18 PM
  3. House panel defies George Bush, votes for subpoenas
    By AliceInWonderland in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 21st, 2007, 03:52 PM
  4. Karl Rove beating the 9/11 drum yet again, right on cue.
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 20th, 2006, 04:43 PM
  5. Strange Karl Rove story
    By buttmunch in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 17th, 2005, 04:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •