Senators delay subpoenas of Rove, Miers.
By on Mar 15th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Senators delay subpoenas of Rove, Miers.
The Senate Judiciary Committee today “authorized the use of subpoenas to five Justice Department officials in the investigation into the dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys. It postponed a vote on the authorization to use subpoenas to compel White House officials to testify, including President Bush’s top political adviser, Karl Rove, and former White House counsel Harriet Miers,” at the request of conservative committee members.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
I told you so.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:12 pmOperative word is postponed
March 15th, 2007 at 12:20 pmFor the latest news, hearings, legal filings and other essential documents on the Bush DOJ prosecutor firings, see:
March 15th, 2007 at 12:20 pm“The U.S. Attorney Scandal Documents.”
What exactly was the basis of their request? We need to make sure our guys get their stories straight? Or… we need to pressure the AG to resign so that these hearings are pretty much viewed as being a waste of time by the general public?
March 15th, 2007 at 12:24 pmFive out of twelve is OK, for a start. Keep pushing for the other seven, Congress. I don’t think the people are going to sit still for less than a full account in this matter. Once the first five start testifying UNDER OATH, there will most likey be even better reason to subpoena the others.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:26 pmthis sucks. however, being generous, i can make the case that the initial testimony of those subpeonaed doj enablers will provide the necessary level of outrage to force additional testimony from white house scumbags, er, staff.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:26 pmWe need to open up hearing on Impeaching Cheney than Old Bush and his admin. We need a woman as Preident. Go Nancy Pelosi Go!!!!!
Rove is so corrupt. When the first Bush was running for office he fired Rove.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:27 pmHe shouldn’t made any decision on any Attorneys.
I thought the majority party decides who gets supbpoenas?
March 15th, 2007 at 12:28 pmYeah, too bad you guys don’t have the Independent Counsel statute anymore ; )
March 15th, 2007 at 12:29 pmI am listening to Thom Hartmann and he just interviewed Greg Palast. Read this:
http://www.gregpalast.com/bush-hit-woman-behind-prosecutor-firings-has-long-history-of-purges-to-protect-bush/#more-1598
Interesting article. Hartmann was trying to get everyone to call their Senators to make sure they follow through with these subpoenas for Rove and Miers.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:30 pmDoesn’t it just give you such a warm and fuzzy feeling to know that the Democrats are still so cooperative with the CONservatives and surely wouldn’t want them to have any harsh feelings towards them? I’m so sick of this – poisonous snakes will bite you even if your nice to them. Is that so hard for our Democrats to understand? These snakes deserve no special consideration.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:31 pmI nearly vomited with rage when I saw they weren’t issuing subpoenas to Rove and Miers. Rove and Miers should testify BEFORE Gonzo so there’s more stuff for those two to step in. If they’re ever called, they’re just going to adjust their testimonies to match.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:32 pm“I told you so.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 12:12 pm”
Jake…… By the rules of the Senate, if one member opposes they MUST wait one week before issueing the damn thing….. It’s still coming, hense the “It postponed a vote on the authorization to use subpoenas to compel White House officials to testify”
From RawStory “The committee also postponed for a week a vote on whether to authorize subpoenas of top aides to President Bush who were involved in the eight firings, including political adviser Karl Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and deputy White House Counsel William K. Kelley,” Laurie Kellman reports for the AP.”
March 15th, 2007 at 12:40 pmRemoveBush sez:
RB, don’t deny Jake his little victories…he gets so few of them these days…
March 15th, 2007 at 12:42 pmlistening to hartman also… well i was before it went quiet minutes ago… not sure why…
anyway –
CALL YOUR or ANY JUDICIARY MEMBER
http://judiciary.senate.gov/members.cfm
866 . 220 . 0044
800 . 839 . 5276
March 15th, 2007 at 12:44 pm.
I wouldn’t get hysterical about this. All they have done is postponed the vote on the subpoenas and none of us know why they have done this. Historically, it is actually more common to attempt to get the highest ranking official to testify first in a given scandal. There will be subpoenas. Democrats don’t need an independent counsel law to go forward with this. I see this as simply being careful because the stakes are very high. There could possibly be more articles of impeachment hidden in this scandal to add to the ones they’ve already written up.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:45 pmYeah, too bad you guys don’t have the Independent Counsel statute anymore ; )
Comment by Jake
Apparently it’s ok with you if your government is corrupt, Jake.
Why is that so?
Whether the Republicans “lose” in this situation, or the Dems “lose,” all Americans are affected by this corruption.
Are you alleging that no illegal activities have taken place? Or just that the Dems can’t “prove” it?
March 15th, 2007 at 12:45 pmYou took comment right out of my fingers, RemoveBush.
In any case, this does put the heat on ole Turdblossom, Bush and the rest of the scumbags in the Whitehouse. Gonzales is a small fish in this mess, a yes-man who takes marching orders from the ones he fears most. I want THOSE guys.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:46 pmPatience…
March 15th, 2007 at 12:48 pm“The wheels of the gods grind slowly,
yet exceedingly fine…”
RemoveBush:
As I recall, I said last night that someone would give them a week.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:48 pmZooey:
It is NOT O.K. with me if our government is corrupt. Your side has simply not proven that is the case. Whether you “can prove it” or not without violating Separation of Powers including, but not limited to Executive Privilege is still to be seen.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:50 pmJake ya better bet used to Boca burgers and Patchouli dude, the stinky hippies are back.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:55 pmSeperation of powers does not mean any one branch of the government can do whatever the hell it wants with impunity.
March 15th, 2007 at 12:56 pmThe concept of seperation of powers was creative to achieve BALANCE of powers.
#20 Joke
As I recall, I said last night that someone would give them a week.
Big f*cking deal. Kyl or Graham was able to block it for a week. Leahy’s going to get Rove in there and there’s nothing he or anyone else in the White House can do about it. What’s Rove’s problem with testifying? Is it because he knows everything about Bush’s crimes? Or is he just afraid of peeing his pants when he gets under the hot lights and gets caught in lie after lie after lie?
You’ve already moved the goalposts into the next county. What are you going to say when Rove is sitting there in the hearing room?
March 15th, 2007 at 12:56 pmhartmans says…
call those judiciary members and tell them
you want to hear HARRIET MYERS under oath NOW.
…
(whew… i got my AAR back…)
March 15th, 2007 at 12:59 pm“RemoveBush:
As I recall, I said last night that someone would give them a week.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 12:48 pm”
You might have somewhere, but the majority of your arguements were that THEY COULD NOT because it would invade that “precidential priviledge” arena and would not be allowed to happen……
I am showing you that this is not the case and that your previous, and current, statements are not factual.
They CAN and WILL now that the crimes are coming to light…… Now do you wonder why the previous Congress did not hold any oversight???? This is just the TIP OF THE ICEBERG!!!!
March 15th, 2007 at 12:59 pmJake: “Whether you “can prove it†or not without violating Separation of Powers including, but not limited to Executive Privilege is still to be seen.”
OK, Jake, you just all but admitted that “Executive Privilege” is more important to you than corruption. In other words, if an executive is corrupt, that’s fine with you and there is no solution if the American people want to fix the corruption. Keep in mind that just 10 years ago, your repubs thought that lying about a blowjob was enough of an issue to shatter any idea of “Executive privilege.” I’m pretty sure you had no problem with that little escapade.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:04 pmI thought there were twelve subpoenas in the waiting room, but there are actually fourteen. I’ll be anxiously waiting to hear what is said in the initial five testimonies. I’m not going to get too upset, YET. There’s time for that, later. The WH is really scrambling and will surely stumble, as they’re not known for thier graceful political moves.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:09 pmIt is NOT O.K. with me if our government is corrupt. Your side has simply not proven that is the case. Whether you “can prove it†or not without violating Separation of Powers including, but not limited to Executive Privilege is still to be seen.
Comment by Jake
I’m calling bullshit on that statement, Jake.
First you say it’s NOT OK if the govenment is corrupt. Yay Jake! Then you snatch that statement back by putting the responsibility of proving it on “your side.” If you were truly interested in determining whether or not there is corruption, YOU and YOUR SIDE should be demanding subpoenas and a complete investigation — not blathering about Separation of Powers and Executive Privilege.
You have revealed yourself as a bedwetter.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:10 pmI would give a kidney AND a lung AND my eyes if Cheney and/or Bush and/or Rove and/or Miers and/or Gonzales (plus the rest of the ‘gang’) would just resign and go away.
I don’t believe for a second that any of them will be fired, impeached, tried, or anything else. They may be subpoenaed (sp?), but they have already shown their propensity and willingness to lie. Who would believe what they had to say? They really don’t care what they are doing to this country. They have brought such a level of corruption and shame to the White House. If they had one scintilla of integrity, honor, or love or respect for this country and its history and its people, they would lower their heads in shame, resign, and walk away.
Of course walking away isn’t good enough, not NEARLY good enough, but it would sure be a start. At least it would give the country some hope for the future and possibly begin the journey of restoring faith in our government (if that is even possible). I don’t know after all this damage it is even possible to put the pieces back together again..
March 15th, 2007 at 1:11 pmRaven:
I agree that Separation of Powers does not mean any one branch of the government can do whatever the hell it wants with impunity. See e.g. U.S. v. Nixon. Since there was no crime here — Presidents CAN dismiss U.S. Attorneys with impunity — confidential advice given in that regard is protected.
chimpeach:
I doubt Leahy’s going to get Rove in there and there’s plenty the White House can do about it. OTOH Dr. Rice testified when I thought she should not have as well. We’ll have to see. As for what I am going to say IF Rove is sitting there in the hearing room, and he actually testifies under subpoena — I’m going to say that was a mistake regardless of what he testifies to.
P.S. BlueDog49 — I don’t think I admitted that at all. See my comments to Raven above and let me know if you still have any questions for me.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:19 pmP.P.S. Zooey — I’m calling bullshit on you having revealed me as a bedwetter — so there!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:21 pmOK, Jake, I can see that critical thinking is not your strong suit. Let’s go through this again. You said: “Whether you “can prove it†or not without violating Separation of Powers including, but not limited to Executive Privilege is still to be seen.”
In other words, what you are arguing is that if you can’t prove corruption without violating Executive Privilege, then you can’t investigate possible corruption. What your words mean (you evidently need someone to tell you what your words mean) is that Executive Privilege is more important to you than eliminating corruption. Do you want to stick with that position? Because that position leads to the conclusion that there is no legal way for our system to deal with a corrupt Executive.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:24 pmTime to grow some balls.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:24 pmYes, Jake, Presidents can dismiss federal prosecutors, but Presidents cannot obstruct justice. That’s what this is about. Our last president was impeached for obstructing justice. Are you holding this president to a different set of standards? I thought conservatives abhored situational ethics.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:27 pm“Postponed” doesn’t mean “Cancelled” as most intelligent people know and this is certainly NOT the end to the subpoena situation. They can and will subpoena anyone whom they believe to be complicit in this newest of debacles to shatter this already-crumbling administration. It will happen – you can bet on it.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:40 pmBesides, if Rove and ding-a-ling Miers have nothing to hide, why not testify willingly? Their refusal to do so will signal that they’re in the “deepest of dookie” and know it. I suspect the latter…..they will resist which will tell the american people just how complicit they are (fingerprints in all of it along with Dubya’s own fingerprints (that is, unless, he, like his sidekick Gonzo, is asleep at the wheel most of the time and has no idea what his #2 man is up to?????)….what a joke!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:42 pmBluedog is correcto! It’s called “obstruction of justice” and unfair dismissal due to political maneuvers…..let’s see how they get around the emails emanating from the RNC on this one! I can’t wait!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:43 pmI told you so.
Comment by Jake — March 15, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Idiot, they are delaying because they are negotiating. They are trying to broker a deal where Gonzales steps down in return for Rove escaping a subpoena.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:48 pmThe delay is procedural and was done by repugs. Its a week delay that can be invoked by a minority. The subpoenas will be issued next week!
March 15th, 2007 at 1:57 pmPuh-leeze…. Democrats will kick and scream like babies and maybe they’ll push Gonzales out, but what do they gain???? For one, if Justice Stevens retires as expected, a moderate appointment that Democrats favor such as Gonzales is off the table. Bush will have to go with a hard right winger like Alito.
But really, back to the point. Democrats are cowards. They won’t impeach Bush or cut funding for the war. Maybe they’ll dangle a few Admin cronies like carrots to feed their hateful base. But in the end, it means nothing.
TP bloggers are so dumb and easily fooled.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:57 pmAnd, if Dubya refuses to fire Gonzo, then we need to call for Dumbya’s resignation as well. After all, the people employ these fools in the first place; the people can call for their dismissal.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:58 pm#42 Puh-lease don’t bet the ranch on it! If so, you’re apt to lose it and every other brain in your head along the way. As most intelligent people can see, it’s the Rethugs who have much to lose in 08 and who are the fence riders and not the Dems. As with all votes, just check the numbers out for yourself and see who’s blocking everything – it’s the corrupt Rethugs, end of story.
As for cutting funds, it will soon become crystal clear that they hold the purse strings and they will find the courage to chop this war off at it’s knees or risk losing the faith and trust of the american people who voted overwhelmingly against the cadre of crooks who were running the show.
I suggest viewing yourself in the mirror when tempted to throw stones without proper justification and/or pertinent facts. It only makes you look like the imbecile that you are purporting others to be.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:02 pmVerbalKint:
Well, I certainly don’t want to see Gonzales resign over this. Neither Janet Reno nor Griffen Bell resigned over their dismissals of U.S. Attorneys involved in ongoing criminal investigations of Democrats.
Bluedog49:
There are plenty of ways to investigate and prove corruption without violating Executive Privilege. Ultimately, there’s always Impeachment. But, IF there had been a crime comitted by the President, then U.S. v. Nixon tells us that’s when Executive Privilege bends — that is definitely the position I am sticking with.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:02 pm#42 – so when a Supreme Court justice steps down, you won’t support Gonzales?? Careful what you wish – Roe is hanging in the balance. Bush will be forced to appoint a conservative and Democrats won’t have the stomach to kiss off Ohio before the election. Gonza is your best bet.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:03 pmtreebark:
My advice next week would be to quash the subpoenas.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:03 pmLHT – we’re going to get the whole family, including Charlie, soon enough – better shave your head.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:07 pmBluedog brings up an interesting point, and a way to change the terminology slightly, but in a way that puts a zinger on those still smitten with W
“Executive Privilege” outweighs corruption worries and charges
Those backing it claim they back the general concept, however, I think it’s more interesting to claim that it’s only THIS President with the Privilege they really back
Fo them, it’s all about “THIS Executive’s Privilege”, they would NEVER stand for say, a President Hillary having the same unchecked imperial powers that they cheer for with W exercising
“THIS Executive’s Privilege” is NOT Constitutionally shielded or protected from legal investigations and prosecutions, and neither are This Executive’s underlings
March 15th, 2007 at 2:09 pmLHT: “Bush will have to go with a hard right winger like Alito.”
And, I assume you see clear sailing for such a nominee with the Democratic Party controlling both houses of Congress. Thanks for demonstrating your firm grasp of the situation.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:10 pm#47 – yes, finally you admit liberal fanasties of killing those who don’t agree with you.
If Democrats want to move forward with investigation after investigation, say good bye to the White House in 2008. You were elected to find a way out of Iraq, not overturn the results the last two elections.
Liberals = hatred and apparently now stupidity.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:10 pm#49 – I DARE Democrats to defeat a Bush nominee. They would kiss off all the red states in 2004 and give Obama and Hillary a ton of bad press.
An overlooked fact in the Alito brawl was that Americans favored his confirmation by a 2-1 margin.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:14 pmnice of them to accommodate consternative members’ requests… I don’t think that would have happened were the Dems to make such a request… best case scenario: they want time to try to convince the others (Rove, etc.) to testify on their own… we shall see…
March 15th, 2007 at 2:14 pmJake, you’re citing a ruling that Kenneth Starr actually used to press the argument that there were limits to Executive Privilege. Associated Press: “In ruling against Nixon in 1974, the high court said presidents should be able to communicate freely with their advisers without fear of public disclosure.
But the court also said Nixon had no compelling reason to withhold the audio tapes — state secrets were not at risk — from prosecutors who were building a criminal case.”
Under U.S. v Nixon, if congress is building a case for obstruction of justice, and state secrets are not at risk, prosecutors have a right to question those involved in the executive branch.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:21 pmP.P.S. Zooey — I’m calling bullshit on you having revealed me as a bedwetter — so there!
Comment by Jake
I can see I was being generous, and far too kind. You’re actually a piss-soaked troll. You might want to change your pants, you’re getting a rash.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:23 pmLHT: “You were elected to find a way out of Iraq, not overturn the results the last two elections.”
Al Gore won the 2000 election. It was your friends on the Supreme Court who overturned the results.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:23 pmP.P.S. Zooey — I’m calling bullshit on you having revealed me as a bedwetter — so there! Comment by Jake
Whatever Diaper dude. You’re so full of sh*t, it probably all comes out brown anyway!
You’re such a st*pid old goat – have you had your head up your *ss your whole life, or just since you *freaked* about your own miserable failure as a human being?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:27 pm“if Democrats want to move forward with investigation after investigation, say good bye to the White House in 2008. You were elected to find a way out of Iraq, not overturn the results the last two elections.
Liberals = hatred and apparently now stupidity.
Comment by Liberals Heart Terrorists — March 15, 2007 @ 2:10 pm”
Actually…… The American people are also tired of the CORRUPTION of the REPUBLICANs!!!! I for one ENCOURAGE the Congress to continue to investigate the CRIMINALS in the WH. I think that it will wake up the majority of the sheeple that still believe GW is god……
Hell, even now the hard christian right is turning against GW on torture…… Just wait a few more months when we really find out some more discusting things that have or are taking place from this administration.
There has been hardly a day go by that another scandal arrises from another scandal…. This administration is nothing but the MOB.
As Randi Rhodes states: “If a Republican reports another Republican for having $50,000 in his fridge, he’s a RAT. If he does it to a Democrat, he’s a patriot”.
That is the same mentality the mob has.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:27 pmJake, I can see by the flood of repeated erroneous posts, that you’re a stubborn as you are st*pid. Is your last name Bush by chance? That potent combination of traits usually requires the kind of white bread inbreeding that created the Bush family. I’m guessing you similarly have few branches in the family tree?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:30 pmLHT – you guys are the manson family sickies, not me.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:52 pm#59 – not true. You probably support partial birth abortion so I would say you would be much more likely to kill than me. From some of the comments I’ve read, you people would hang conservatives if you could get away with it. You’re sick and hateful.
#55 – Al Gore lost Florida. Get over it. MoveOn please.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:02 pmA big slotch of purple is all there is in Washington. No red, no blue.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:54 pmOBSTRUCTIONIST repugnant-repub rightwingnut crank fudge-pachyderm senators TRYING DESPERATELY TO BLOCK THE INEVITABLE SUMMONING OF Rove, Miers, and Gonzales TO FACE THE FIRING SQUAD, THEN Cheney, CHIMPya, Rice, ET CETERA AD NAUSEUM–WHAT A BUNCH OF BOZO THE CLOWNS(tm)–OH, I’M SORRY–THAT’S INSULTING TO BOZO, WHO NEVER DID A MEAN THING IN HIS LIFE, UNLIKE THESE PERNICIOUS CREEPS!!!!!
March 15th, 2007 at 4:03 pm[...] Senate Judiciary Committee conservatives delayed a vote to subpoena Rove and Miers until next week. 4:18 pm | [...]
March 15th, 2007 at 4:19 pmJust a couple of random thoughts
delay – 1. to postpone; to defer; to hinder 2. in political parlance, a term derived from nefarious low life scoundrel and Texan politician named DeLay – a verb meaning to engage in some illegal or immoral, or unethical Machiavellian machination to commit or cover up a political;ly motivated crime.
Although he has too much class to do so, I long for the day when Vermont Senator leans toward Cheney’s ear and says,
March 15th, 2007 at 5:33 pm“It’s time for you to Go F*** Yourself! “
Liberals Heart Terrorists: “From some of the comments I’ve read, you people would hang conservatives if you could get away with it. You’re sick and hateful.”
“Okay scratch that, how about rounding ALL registered democruds up and giving them a nice dose of aerial VX nerve gas or another chemical weapon of some kind.”
Comment by Democrud Maggot Farmer — February 16, 2007 @ 4:48 pm
“Careful Bluedog or I’ll behead you and put the video tape on the internet for your family to see it. bwahahahaha!”
Comment by Cynicon Implant — March 15, 2007 @ 2:03 pm
“I do! And I hope they pulled his fingernails out also!”
Comment by michael — March 15, 2007 @ 4:38 pm
March 15th, 2007 at 5:37 pm