Tag: Karl Rove (page 2)
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 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.
(13 comments, 337 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
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...]
(18 comments, 1054 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
[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.
(7 comments, 459 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
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.
(4 comments, 636 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
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.
"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.]
(49 comments) Permalink :: Comments
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.
(6 comments) Permalink :: Comments
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,
(2 comments, 268 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
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.
(16 comments) Permalink :: Comments
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.
(6 comments) Permalink :: Comments
Update: Newsweek interviews an expert on whether it's really possible to lose e-mails.
Karl Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, says his client didn't intentionally delete any e-mails and cooperated fully with Fitzgerald's request for e-mail in PlameGate.
Rove's lawyer said the senior presidential adviser had no idea that his e-mails were being deleted from the RNC server. "His understanding starting very, very early in the administration was that those e-mails were being archived," Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, said.
The prosecutor probing the Valerie Plame spy case saw and copied all of Rove's e-mails from his various accounts after searching Rove's laptop, his home computer, and the handheld computer devices he used for both the White House and Republican National Committee, Luskin said.
The prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, subpoenaed the e-mails from the White House, the RNC and Bush's re-election campaign, he added. "There's never been any suggestion that Fitzgerald had anything less than a complete record," Luskin said.
The only deletions Rove made were done to clean up his inbox.
(24 comments, 246 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
Things didn't go too well after Karl Rove's appearance at American University in Washington Tuesday night.
Rove was on the campus to talk to the College Republicans, but when he got outside more than a dozen students began throwing things at him and at his car, an American University spokesperson said.
The students then got on the ground and laid down in front of his car as a protest.he students said security officials picked them up and carried them away so Rove could leave.
There were no arrests and police described the protest as "peaceful."
(97 comments) Permalink :: Comments
Karl Rove has emerged unscathed in the justice system so far. But the New York Times puts out its claws today and draws blood.
I can't remember a time during PlameGate, the closest Karl Rove came to being indicted, that the New York Times so lambasted Rove.
Whatever the immediate objective, Mr. Rove seems focused on one overarching goal: creating a permanent Republican majority, even if that means politicizing every aspect of the White House and subverting the governmental functions of the executive branch.
....This was, perhaps, the inevitable result of taking the chief operative of a presidential campaign, one famous for his scorched-earth style, and ensconcing him in the White House — not in a political role, but as a key player in the formation of policy. Mr. Rove never had to submit to Senate confirmation hearings. Yet, from the very start, photographs of cabinet meetings showed him in the background, keeping an enforcer’s eye on the proceedings. After his re-election in 2004, President Bush formally put Mr. Rove in charge of all domestic policy.
The Times says Congress shouldn't let Rove skate on testifying under oath at hearings on the fired U.S. Attorneys.
The investigation of the firings of the United States attorneys seems to be closing in on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who should have been fired weeks ago. But Congress should bring equal scrutiny to the more powerful Mr. Rove. If it does, especially by forcing him to testify in public, it will find that he has been at the vortex of many of the biggest issues they are now investigating.
I think Karl Rove's bigger problem is that Bush is now a lame duck and the media figures his lieutenants are now fair game.
The whole bunch of them are about to see their power dwindle.
It's up to us in 2008 to ensure we get a regime change, not just a name change.
(9 comments) Permalink :: Comments
“I do not believe in this ‘We’ll have a private briefing for you where we’ll tell you everything,’ and they don’t,” Mr. Leahy said on “This Week” on ABC, adding: “I want testimony under oath. I am sick and tired of getting half-truths on this.”
Cohen consulted with Congressional staff and law professor Stephen Gillers and comes up with this list of possible crimes:
- Misrepresentation to Congress: 18 U.S.C. 1505
- Calling Prosecutors: 18 U.S.C. 1512©
- Witness Tampering: 18 U.S.C. 1512(b)
- Firing the Attorneys: 18 U.S.C. 1512©
(1 comment, 387 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
It's not only Alberto Gonzales who's in trouble, Karl Rove has some explaining to do as well. As Shakespeare wrote,
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and caldron bubble.
Dan Froomkin, writing in Friday's Washington Post, The Politics of Distraction, warns us not to miss the forest for the trees. Whether Alberto Gonzales stays or goes, there's more to the story of the U.S. Attorney firings, and Karl Rove is in the midst of the soup.
(13 comments, 909 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
Sen. Patrick Leahy was on CNN's The Situation Room. Speaking of Karl Rove, he said (no link, received from show by e-mail):
BLITZER: The White House counsel, Fred Fielding, was up on the Hill today. I don't know if you had a chance to meet with him. But he's not necessarily ruling out allowing some White House staffers, maybe even Karl Rove to come and testify. Do you want Karl Rove to testify before your panel?
LEAHY: I've never met Mr. Fielding. Frankly, I don't care whether he says he's going to allow people or not. We'll subpoena the people we want. If they want to defy the subpoena, then you get into a stonewall situation I suspect they don't want to have.
BLITZER: Will you subpoena Karl Rove?
LEAHY: Yes. He can appear voluntarily if he wants. If he doesn't, I will subpoena him. The attorney general said, Well, there are some staff people or lower level people -- I'm not sure whether I want to allow them to testify or not. I said, Frankly, Mr. Attorney General, it's not your decision. It's mine and the committee's. We will have subpoenas. I would hope that they wouldn't try to stonewall subpoenas.
(12 comments, 514 words in story) There's More :: Permalink :: Comments
|<< Previous 15||Next 15 >>|