Rove Deposition Date(Feb 23rd). Legal Battle Brewing

[tekisui]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Judiciary Committee has rescheduled a deposition for former senior White House adviser Karl Rove, ordering him to appear Feb. 23 instead of Monday.

It is uncertain that Rove would appear, since a federal appeals court is considering whether former White House aides can be compelled to testify about matters on which they advised the president.

The committee subpoena commanded Rove to testify about any role he played in politically motivated firings of U.S. attorneys, and the prosecution of former Alabama Democratic Gov. Don Siegelman.

Siegelman has alleged his prosecution was pushed by Republicans, including Rove. The former governor was convicted on bribery and other charges and was sentenced to more than seven years in prison. He was released early when a federal appeals court ruled his appeal raised "substantial questions."

Committee chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., said Friday he wanted to give Rove's lawyer time to consult with the Obama administration and learn whether the new president would uphold Bush's order against testifying.

Rove attorney Robert Luskin said his client was free to answer questions on the Siegelman prosecution.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iyqAcKxVxPpJsQZL8zvlZGO6GE3AD961NOAO0

B*sh's Letter:

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.

The letters set the stage for what is likely to be a highly contentious legal and political battle over an unresolved issue: whether a former president can assert "executive privilege"—and therefore prevent his aides from testifying before Congress—even after his term has expired.

"To my knowledge, these 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'."

more: http://www.newsweek.com/id/182240

[tekisui]

1. Feb. 18th, Obama Adminstration to Rule on rover's Letter From Chimpy:

On February 18th, The Obama administration will announce where it stands on President Bush’s claim of retroactive executive privilege for his aides. If Obama supports it, Karl Rove may never testify. Liberals will instantly explode.

If you haven't been following the Karl Rove subpoena circus, then you've clearly been missing some choice meat. Rove, aka Bush's Brain, aka Turd Blossom, has, over the course of 8 years, risen to the top of the deck in the Liberal's "Most Wanted" cards for endless reasons. Since House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers issued a subpoena last spring for Rove to testify in the firings of the U.S. attorneys scandal, Rove has been dodging his court date claiming "absolute immunity."

There has been a lot of legal ping pong played over this issue of Bush's use of executive privilege being extended to his aides, and now the games will get more interesting.

Newsweek reported this week that a mere 4 days before President Bush left office, White House Counsel, Fred Fielding informed Rove's lawyer Robert Luskin by letter that Rove should not testify before congress in any future inquiries regarding alleged misconduct while in the Bush administration. Bush, the letter explains, will be asserting executive privilege even after he leaves office.

And now, Conyers has issued a new subpoena for Rove, saying quite bluntly, "It's time for him to talk."

On February 18th, the Obama administration is set to file an appeal brief stating their position on Bush's claim of absolute immunity for other former Bush aides, Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten. This court case currently in the US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit came about after a federal judge previously rejected Bush's claim of immunity for these aides. If Obama supports Bush's claim, then that may help decide Miers and Bolten's appeal and ultimately decide Rove's fate as well. Obama has previously stated he doesn't want to go on a witch hunt of the former administration, but he has also argued against these sweeping immunity claims for aides. Also, whatever Obama's team decides has legal implications for his own administration in regards to executive privilege.

more: http://www.411mania.com/politics/columns/95788/February-18th:-The-Day-President-Obama-Destroys-His-Liberal-Base?.htm

[SIMPLYB1980]

2. They need to just drag his ass in already.

[global1]

3. I Was Thinking About Rove Testifying And Surmised That He Would Be.....

lying his ass off during the process. Now I hope Conyers Committee has memo's, facts and other people's testimony in hand so that Rove can't get away with lying. I was wondering how anyone can refute anything that Rove says during testimony. I'm thinking that if they don't get him for high crimes and treason - at least they can get him on perjury.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

[SIMPLYB1980]

5. I would say that's correct.

If I remember right Fitz had all the evidence he needed to get rove in the scooter trial, but it was just not part of what his investigation was set up to do.

Edited to add: I think Rove would have no choice, but to purger himself or he would set up others in the Bush White house to take the fall.

[backscatter712]

4. Four words: United States vs. Nixon

That's the SCOTUS case that decided that executive privilege does not apply when it is used to conceal evidence of criminal conduct.

That's what Conyers is investigating, is it not? Criminal conduct by the Bush Administration.