Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rove on the Lam; Still Hiding Behind 'Executive Privilege'

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 7:31 AM on January 30, 2009.


Everyone seems to be waiting to see what Obama's White House counsel, Greg Craig, thinks about all of this.
srovelarge

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Earlier this week, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) let Karl Rove know -- by way of a subpoena -- that he still has a few questions about the Bush administration's Justice Department scandals. So, might Rove stop by the Hill to answer lawmakers' questions? Not if the former president and his lawyers have anything to do with it.

 

Just four days before he left office, President Bush instructed former White House aide Karl Rove to refuse to cooperate with future congressional inquiries into alleged misconduct during his administration.

 

On Jan. 16, 2009, then White House Counsel Fred Fielding sent a letter (.pdf) to Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin. The message: should his client receive any future subpoenas, Rove "should not appear before Congress" or turn over any documents relating to his time in the White House. The letter told Rove that President Bush was continuing to assert executive privilege over any testimony by Rove -- even after he leaves office.

A nearly identical letter (.pdf) was also sent by Fielding the day before to a lawyer for former White House counsel Harriet Miers, instructing her not to appear for a scheduled deposition with the House Judiciary Committee. That letter reasserted the White House position that Miers has "absolute immunity" from testifying before Congress about anything she did while she worked at the White House -- a far-reaching claim that is being vigorously disputed by lawyers for the House of Representatives in court.

 

 

Rove relied on an executive-privilege claim to ignore the subpoena the last time -- the matter is still pending in the courts -- but it's far less clear if a former president can assert executive privilege after he's left office.

Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, believes that former presidents still retain executive privilege on matters relating to their time in office, and with Bush having ordered Rove not to talk to Congress, Rove feels he has to comply.

"To my knowledge, these [letters] are unprecedented," said Peter Shane, an Ohio State University law professor who specializes in executive-privilege issues. "I'm aware of no sitting president that has tried to give an insurance policy to a former employee in regard to post-administration testimony." Shane likened the letter to Rove as an attempt to give his former aide a 'get-out-of-contempt-free card'."

 

Everyone seems to be waiting to see what Obama's White House counsel, Greg Craig, thinks about all of this. Stay tuned.

Digg!

Tagged as: bush, rove, obama, conyers, greg craig, subpeona


Say Goodbye to Common Sense: RedState Compares Health Care Reform to Attack on Pearl Harbor
It's beginning to seem that the right-wing media simply doesn't know what the word terrorism means.
Post by Brooke Obie. November 25, 2009.
Damn Good Recipe for Stuffing Right Here
Seriously.
Post by Joshua Holland. November 25, 2009.
Dana Perino Claims No Terrorist Attacks on U.S. During Bush Presidency
And here are the reasons why this should not be a shocking comment coming from her.
Post by Jed Lewison. November 25, 2009.
Advertisement
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?