Tag: Karl Rove (page 2)

Former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman filed a 99 page appeal brief today. I received a copy of the brief but it says "embargoed until tomorrow" so I'm not uploading it tonight.

The part that addresses Karl Rove is contained in a sentencing argument. The Court departed upwards from the sentencing guidelines because of unspecified statements Siegelman made to the media critical of the Executive Branch. (I quote some of that argument at the end of this very long post.)

Karl Rove was subpoenaed today by the House Judiciary Committee. His lawyer will fight the subpoena. From the April, 2008 Judiciary Committee report (pdf): [More...]

Yesterday I mentioned that following Hillary Clinton's interview with Greta Van Susteren, Karl Rove came on and gave a laundry list of exaggerations by Barack Obama. He spoke really fast so I couldn't grab them all, but the transcript is now on Lexis. Here's his list:

"We have had Senator Obama said his parents met and joined -- got together at the Selma March, and that led to them being together and him being born. Well, he was born four years before the Selma March.

He claimed to be a constitutional law professor, and turned out not to be.

Claimed to speak fluent Indonesia as a child. His schoolteacher said that was not the case.

He claimed to be involved in an asbestos campaign in public housing in his book, and it turned out not to be the case.

More...

Writing in the Wall St. Journal today, Karl Rove offers some advice for Hillary Clinton with respect to challenging Barack Obama:

Mrs. Clinton can do much more to draw attention to Mr. Obama's lack of achievements. She can agree with Mr. Obama's statement Tuesday night that change is difficult to achieve on health care, energy, poverty, schools and immigration -- and then question his failure to provide any leadership on these or other major issues since his arrival in the Senate. His failure to act, advocate or lead on what he now claims are his priorities may be her last chance to make a winning argument.

Other than that advice, the column is a disappointing, and in my view, inaccurate portrayal of Obama as a leftist hiding in centrist clothing. I think Obama is a centrist. See my new post comparing his and Hillary's progressive voting record and rankings.

Karl Rove has a preview of attacks we can expect Republicans to make against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, once either gets the Democratic nomination for President. On Obama:

“He got elected three years ago, and he [has] spent almost the entire time running for president,” Rove said.

Rove added that Obama has only passed one piece of legislation during his time in the U.S. Senate, and during his time in Illinois state Senate, Obama had “an unusual habit” of voting “present” instead of yes or no.

On Hillary:

On Clinton, Rove said the senator talks about fiscal responsibility but has introduced “$800 billion in new spending and the campaign is less than half over.”

Rove said that “the woman” wants to repeal all of Bush’s tax cuts, and that she can be targeted for voting against “troop funding” in the form of her votes against the Iraq war supplementals.

More...

Former Press Secretary Scott McClellan's forthcoming book contains these paragraphs about the leak of Valerie Plame's identity:

The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

"There was one problem. It was not true.

"I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration "were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the president himself."

Valerie Plame Wilson responds: [More...]

In April, 2007, Rep. Henry Waxman, Chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, wrote this letter (pdf) to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales about the missing RNC e-mails.

[RNC Counsel Rob] Kelner's briefing raised particular concerns about Karl Rove, who according to press reports used his RNC account for 95% of his communications. According to Mr. Kelner, although the hold started in August 2004, the RNC does not have any e-mails prior to 2005 for Mr. Rove. Mr. Kelner did not give any explanation for the e-mails missing from Mr. Rove's account, but he did acknowledge that one possible explanation is that Mr. Rove personally deleted his e-mails from the RNC server.

Mr. Kelner also explained that starting in 2005, the RNC began to treat Mr. Rove's emails in a special fashion. At some point in 2005, the RNC commenced an automatic archive policy for Mr. Rove, but not for any other White House officials. According to Mr. Kelner, this archive policy removed Mr. Rove's ability to personally delete his e-mails from the RNC server.

Mr. Kelner did not provide many details about why this special policy was adopted for Mr. Rove. But he did indicate that one factor was the presence of investigative or discovery requests or other legal concerns. It was unclear from Mr. Kelner's briefing whether the special archiving policy for Mr. Rove was consistently in effect after 2005.

The Committee's investigation page is here (pdf). Susan Ralston's 2007 deposition is here.

Jason at Truthout writes today about the RNC's claim for executive privilege. Also see Scribe's diary from April about possible implications for Rove.

More...

Peter Baker in the Washington Post quotes Karl Rove :

About a year and a half ago, it became apparent talking to my family that there are things happening, that it was time to go."

Marcy at Empty Wheel has been cataloguing the remaining investigations that could land Rove in hot soup and notes, "we have no clear denial that Rove is leaving because the investigations into his activities may soon bear fruit."

About a year and a half ago puts us at January - March, 2006. Rove had already skirted PlameGate. There was no U.S. Attorney firing investigation going on then, or congressional investigations into politicizing federal agencies. Investigation into missing e-mails weren't that big a deal.

Rove and his wife live in Washington, not Texas. I don't think they own a house in Texas any more, although I think they own one in Florida. They have one child who is off at college. Leaving now to spend more time with the family unless someone in the family is very ill doesn't ring true. We haven't heard about any severe illness.

What Rove did have a year and a half ago, that would worry any family, were big time legal bills from PlameGate. Now that Rove is facing congressional and other inquiries on so many fronts, the U.S. Attorney firing scandal, the improper use of federal agencies for lobbying activities, the RNC E-mails and even the continuation of the Abramoff investigation and possible troubles via former aide Susan Ralston, his legal bills can only be mounting. And his lawyer, Robert Luskin, doesn't come cheap.

More...

How close did Karl Rove come to getting indicted in PlameGate? As they say, "this close." Check out today's re-issued opinion (pdf) in the Judith Miller - Matthew Cooper D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals subpoena case containing new un-redactions: the name of Karl Rove.

Now unredacted:

"Regarding Cooper, the special counsel has demonstrated that his testimony is essential to charging decisions regarding White House adviser Karl Rove."

Then on page 39:

"Thus, given the compelling showing of need and exhaustion, plus the sharply tilted balance between harm and news value, the special counsel may overcome the reporters’ qualified privilege, even if his only purpose—at least at this stage of his investigation—is to shore up perjury charges against leading suspects such as Libby and Rove."

The unredaction there is the last two words: "and Rove."

There's more goodies, including those about Armitage, Libby and Cheney. The pdf is searchable, type in your favorite name. The unredactions are in italics.

[Hat tip to TL reader and diarist Scribe.]

Thursday night, during the Presidential debate, John Edwards will call upon President Bush to fire Karl Rove.

Karl Rove’s shameless attempts to twist the federal government for partisan gain have simply gone too far. Rove is now clearly at the heart of the political firing and replacement of U.S. Attorneys warping the impartial execution of justice that all Americans depend on—and that’s just the beginning. We need to take a stand right now to defend the integrity of our government and our democracy—Karl Rove must be fired.

He has a petition he'd like you to sign.

Will Bush listen? Not to John alone. Not to you or me alone. But if thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of us speak out together to demand accountability for Karl Rove and end their era of cynical, destructive, partisan government—we cannot be ignored.

Please add your name, so when John speaks out at tomorrow's debate it's clear that he's speaking for thousands. We'll keep a signature counter online to show how many have joined the call.

Think Progress reports that the House Judiciary Committee has voted to grant Monica Goodling immunity for her testimony about the firing of U.S. Attorneys.

On MSNBC yesterday, fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, in addition to saying he filed a Complaint with the Office of Special Counsel against Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzales (and Goodling) for violating the Hatch Act,

It’s is something I filed back on April 3 of this year…based on, you know, Special Counsel having powers to investigate where evidence goes. I actually filed a Hatch Act complaint against Gonzales, McNulty, Sampson and Goodling and they’re already getting documents from the Justice Department and possibly from the White House. […]

...I think Monica Goodling is holding the keys to the kingdom. I think if they get her to testify under oath with a transcript, and have her describe the process between the information flow between the White House counsel, White House and the Justice Department, I believe the picture becomes a lot clearer.

As to Rove,

More...

The blogosphere has been abuzz today with the report in the L.A. Times that the little known Office of Special Counsel will investigate the U.S. Attorney firings and political activities led by Karl Rove.

Before you get too excited, let's look at who's in charge of the investigation. It's Scott Bloch, a Bush appointee who's been under investigation himself.

Bloch, a Kansas lawyer who served at the Justice Department's Task Force for Faith-based and Community Initiatives, was appointed by President Bush three years ago. Since he took the helm in 2004, staffers at the OSC, a small agency of about 100 lawyers and investigators, have accused him of a range of offenses, from having an anti-gay bias to criticizing employees for wearing short skirts and tight pants to work.

David Corn has many more details in his new Nation column.

I was skeptical this morning. Now, I'm wondering why the LA Times reporter omitted this critical information about Bloch. As Corn says,

It is a dizzying situation. The investigator investigating officials who oversee the agency that is investigating the investigator. Forget firewalls. This looks more like a basement flooded with backed-up sewage--with the water rising.

Earlier, I linked to this Newsweek article today in which a data recovery expert was interviewed on the missing e-mails. The interview includes this q and a:

What would you do if you were pulled into this White House case?

If they were really doing their job, they would have to give access to forensic specialists. Those companies can go in and find that e-mail file and then sort through it using proprietary software and hardware. But the government is going to have to open their doors. Top secret stuff is on there, I'm sure, and they'd make it hard.

But, the RNC files are not top secret and those are the missing files now at issue, at least with respect to Karl Rove.

And, if there was anything "top secret," wouldn't that be an incredible breach of security for the information to reside outside secure government servers?

This may become a Catch-22 for Bush. Either the Administration was incredibly lax about top secret information or there was no top secret information.

Marcy (Empty Wheel) has some terrific posts up about the Rove-Hadley e-mail and Fiztgerald and the missing e-mails.

Also not to be missed, Glenn Greenwald. Jack Cafferty at CNN highlighted it -- Crooks and Liars has the video.