« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
In Contempt Vote on Karl Rove, the Ayes Have It
The House Judiciary Committee has just voted to hold Karl Rove in contempt for failing to respond to a subpoena to face questioning from the Committee on the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.
The final vote was 20 ayes and 14 nays. With Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) voting "absolutely, 100% aye."
In a memo on the Full Committee meeting, Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) summarized the facts surrounding Rove's refusal to even appear before the committee and assert executive privilege:
Mr. Rove has refused even to appear before the Committee and assert whatever privileges that he believes may apply to his testimony, relying on excessively broad and legally insufficient claims of "absolute immunity" - never recognized by any court - in declining to appear.
Advertisement
Me, too, I vote "Aye," too.
July 30, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
... absolutely 100% aye.
July 30, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
This will be followed up with a vote to draft a sternly worded letter...
July 30, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
In which the vote to draft a sternly - Democrats caved and the matter was dropped.
July 30, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
... but only after issuing a statement along the lines of "this committee feels it's best to not look to the past, but move forward with the important work the American people ask of us..."
July 30, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
The sad part is, I can envision such a statement being made. The Dems practically beg people to give their committee hearings the finger. It would be nice to see the Dems get a "veto-proof" majority, but I still don't think it will assist in their spine development.
July 30, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
You forgot:
"And please, don't do it again."
July 30, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pass the 32oz bottle of K-Y Gel Please
July 30, 2008 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
comtempt yes but was there any discusion to have him arrested or does he continue to go about making big bucs?
July 30, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Such bold action! They stood up and standed up and all that.
July 30, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great news! BUT will they actually follow through?
July 30, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Being found in contempt of Congress is a bona fide big deal.
July 30, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
If the Get-Along-Gang can stop trying to be nice to the contemptible Bushies and do more than send sternly worded letters.
July 30, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
If it is a "big deal" then whatever became of Myers' and Bolten's contempt charges? I don't remember them being frog-marched off to a cell.
July 30, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/10/749446.aspx
The House is doing its job. The problem is an executive branch that's in for a reckoning once this gets in front of a judge.
July 30, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
That was in March. What's the status of that lawsuit?
July 30, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
you may be right too
http://www.ensicakvideolar.com
December 5, 2008 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
yep.agree!!
http://www.ensicakvideolar.com
December 5, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
zack...while I agree w/ you that it should be a big deal...here are my thoughts on the HJC and Rep Conyers in particular!
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/obama1st/
July 30, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Until January when the pardon comes.
July 30, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Contempt of Congress can not be pardoned by the President...
July 30, 2008 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cool. So, correct me if I'm wrong, the next step is someone bringing up to Congress, a full vote, and, if that works someone in Justice going through with it?
July 30, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
IF past behavior is any prediction, this will NOT be a big deal. Sorry to say. Unless the "sternly worded letter" is considered a big deal.
July 30, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
this is a good start but i wanna see him in handcuffs ...................
July 30, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's only a recommendation. Pelosi has to decide whether to bring it to a vote.
July 30, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Not a bad start.
It would be quite satisfying to see that pig brought to the House in cuffs.
July 30, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if the House could put a bounty on Rove and hire bounty hunters?
It works for bail bondsmen.
July 30, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would pay $10,000 to see Dog the Bounty Hunter toss a squealing, zip-tied Rove head-first into that Black Suburban...
July 30, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is hilarious.
July 30, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is a big deal only if Mukasey honors the contempt charges.
Myers & Bolten got off easy because Mukasey refused to honer the contempt charges and did not arrest them.
July 30, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
This tells you everything you need to know.
July 30, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is a big deal only if Mukasey honors the contempt charges.
Myers & Bolten got off easy because Mukasey refused to honer the contempt charges and did not arrest them.
Exactly. And we know that's not going to happen, just as we know Pelosi's not going to bring this recommendation to a vote, just as we know that no one's goign to send the Seargant at Arms down to frog march rove into a cell.
I'll believe it when I see it.
July 30, 2008 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Conyers:
'this outta cover us for another month, then we can coast to the election.'
July 30, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not a bad start.
I want to see the little Pig Boy in handcuffs, though.
July 30, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, does anyone know if these contempt charges can be taken up by the next AG? Do they expire or have statute of limitations?
July 30, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Contempt of Congress does not have any statute of limitations. There is no "statute" per se, but a vote by the respective house of Congress which is holding the perp in contempt. I'm not sure, but as a Grand Jury contempt charge ends when the empanelled grand jury expires, it is possible (I don't know the answer off the top of my head) that the contempt charge would end at the expiration of the term of Congress which would be January 1, 2009.
July 30, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank goodness for John Conyers! Yes, something much more swift & severe should happen to Rove & Co. but it is not helpful or even fair to blame Conyers for that. Better to push Pelosi for more action. Or hold Senate Judiciary member Feinstein accountable for confirming I-won't-prosecute-the-Bushies Makasey.
July 30, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can't believe you don't hold Rep Conyers to blame for his complicit behavior w/ the Bushies. He is so beyond the hero he was for me at one time. He is responsible for the Miers, Barlett and Rove getting away from being held accountable. Did you ever hear of inherent contempt? He is a pathetic figure of what he once was...I have no respect for such a ineffective chairman of the HJC.
WAKE UP and see just how complicit he is!
July 30, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink