Dem source: "We want to build up and get documents to have basis to ask questions of Rove"

[sabra]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/13/why-wasnt-rove-subpoenaed/

WASHINGTON (CNN) – As congressional subpoenas flew Wednesday morning over last year’s controversial firings of eight U.S. attorneys, two Democratic congressional sources explained to CNN why House and Senate Judiciary Committees elected not to subpoena White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove.

Both sources told CNN the committees are building their investigation and – like any investigation – they want to build their case by talking to and gathering information from lower level witnesses and officials before they possibly move to the more senior witnesses.

“We want to build up and get documents to have basis to ask questions of Rove,” one Democratic congressional source explained. “It’s the way you do it in any investigation.”

But the source conceded it is likely the investigation will lead to a constitutional showdown with the executive branch and the likelihood is Congress will never get a chance to talk to any of these White House witnesses.

[havocmom]

1. sounds like a plan

Hard to bust his chops if he doesn't have to go up and chant:
I don't recall to avoid a Contempt of Congress or perjury conviction.

Line the little ducks up first then go for the big turkey.

edited for clarity

[hang a left]

2. The showdown will occur with Meirs and Taylor

I am sure the committee chairs expected this. Hopefully they are prepared for the battle.

[Demeter]

3. `No, no!' said the Queen. `Sentence first--verdict afterwards.'

I'm going with the Queen of Hearts on this one. I should think there was enough evidence, hard copy and verified by multiple sources, by now. How many times can a man be hanged for treason, anyway?

[Cass]

4. This part of the article took the wind out my sails...

But the source conceded it is likely the investigation will lead to a constitutional showdown with the executive branch and the likelihood is Congress will never get a chance to talk to any of these White House witnesses.

This source sounds like he's throwing in the towel before things get started. The constitutional crisis involves executive privilege, right? Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought there was precedent with both Nixon and Clinton regarding executive privilege?

[Robbien]

6. Yeah. Why would they say that to CNN?

Even if they thought that might be the case, why tell CNN "please tell the world that we don't think this is going to go anywhere".

idiots

[acmavm]

8. They want to look like they're doing something while not really

doing anything.

They've got enough shit on these clowns to impeach now. If ever there was a case, if ever there will be a case, they've got it.

The dems we elected last November will still be holding 'hearings' in January of 2009.

[liberal N proud]

5. All they will get is "I don't recall" and "I can't remember" from these people

They will be coached on averting the questions and non answers just like any others who have had non/testimony in front of congressional committees

[whistle]

7. Has Karl Rove agreed to appear before a congressional committee?