Karl Rove

<groan>

I thought he was above the law.

I thought he was above the law.

He is the law...

He is the law...

And his lawishness was upheld 5-4 by the Supreme Court.

When , if ever, will Karl Rove be made to testify before the Congressional Judiciary Committee? Has some dropped the ball on this or is Mr. Rove just above the law?

Be patient...karma will rule.

And his lawishness was upheld 5-4 by the Supreme Court.

I depends on what the meaning of the word was....was.

Be patient...karma will rule.

I think, ultimately, that karma is all we'll be able to hang on Mr. Rove....yea, even Scott McClellan recently added more suspiscion to the various charges that could be brought to bare on this "architect' of the Bush Fiasco.

Let him just continue his hypocritical live feeds on Fox from Rosemary Beach....but let us , both Repubs, Independant, and Dems go forward, try to unite this partisan and divided country of ours and look to the future!!

I think we should call it Karlma :shock:

Conyers full letter is reprinted below: June 16, 2008

Via Fax and U.S. Mail
Mr. Robert D. Luskin
Patton Boggs LLP
2550 M Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20037-1350

Dear Mr. Luskin:

We are writing with respect to the pending subpoena for Mr. Rove?s appearance on July 10 before the Committee?s Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee and related discussions between you and Committee staff. We want to reemphasize that we expect Mr. Rove to attend the hearing. Any concerns about or objections to specific questions can be dealt with at that time. We also want to state, however, that while we remain willing to work to resolve any concerns on a cooperative basis, your recent proposal to hold an interview limited to the Siegelman matter does not meet the Committee?s oversight needs.

Specifically, we understand that you recently suggested to Committee staff that Mr. Rove would be willing to be interviewed by Committee members and staff, without a transcript or an oath, but also without prejudice to the Committee?s right to pursue its subpoena for sworn testimony. This is an important step forward, and stands in stark contrast to the White House?s demand that it would not allow the Committee to conduct a similar interview with Harriet Miers unless the Committee agreed in advance that it would not thereafter pursue such formal testimony. While we were encouraged by this suggestion, we also understand that you indicated more recently that any such interview that Mr. Rove would agree to prior to July 10 would be limited only to questions concerning the Siegelman matter.

As Committee staff made clear, and as we indicated in our May 1 letter, the proposal that we somehow seek to separate the Siegelman matter from the broader issue of politicization of the Justice Department is unacceptable. Indeed, your own April 29 letter appears to recognize that the Siegelman matter, other selective prosecution matters, and the U.S. Attorney firings are clearly related as part of the concerns regarding politicization of the Justice Department under this Administration that the Committee has been investigating. At this point, moreover, we have not even received a formal objection to the subpoena, which is a legal mandate that Mr. Rove appear as scheduled.

Accordingly, we hope and expect that Mr. Rove will appear on July 10, when any objections to specific questions on executive privilege or other grounds can be dealt with appropriately. We remain very willing to meet with you and your client to discuss this matter. Please direct any questions or communications to the Judiciary Committee office, 2138 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515(tel: 202-225-XXXX; fax: 202-225-XXXX)
Sincerely,
____________________________________
John Conyers, Jr.
Chairman
____________________________________
Linda T. S?nchez
Chair, Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law
cc: Hon. Lamar S. Smith
Hon. Chris Cannon

http://rawstory.com/news08/2008/06/16/conyers-reemphasizes-subpoena-threat-for-rove-testimony/

I think we should call it Karlma :shock:

Be patient...karma will rule.

As my old friend Mr. Old used to say, "indeed". And sometimes also, "inevitably", despite initial appearances to the contrary.

I trying to prevent my neighborhood Cooper's Hawk from taking my neighborhood baby Mourning Dove. Parallels abound, in SoWal and in wider views of the world.

I thought he was above the law.

A bold and somewhat cynical outlook for a Republican, I'd say...

A bold and somewhat cynical outlook for a Republican, I'd say...

Sarcasm is very hard to portray at times. Maybe I should be using more smiley faces.

Sarcasm is very hard to portray at times. Maybe I should be using more smiley faces.

Someone needs to go invent an Irony Alert! smiley. I really don't like smilies, but sometimes I think a statement is so transparently and obviously ironic I forget I need to :rofl: supplement everything. We know what you meant, dubyarobert.

Karl Rove...well, I'm not gonna say I'm a fan. Clearly, I haven't enjoyed the fruits of his work. Still, he's a man doing a job. He's very, very successful at his job. He doesn't pretend to be a good guy. He doesn't hide the fact that he will fight dirty. He has a vision of conservative country led by an extremely powerful President (so powerful the framers would spin in their graves, IMHO). Karl Roves less savory tactics are obvious to everyone, and most people chose to follow his 'leaders' anyway.

It's so silly to focus so much negative energy on one man because he seems to have an uncanny ability to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the electorate. It's the toleration of those tactics, and the acquiescence in the turn not toward conservatism but authoritarianism, the perpetual campaign, the business profiteering of our government on the part of the majority of the people that we should be worrying our pretty little heads about.

We shouldn't talk about the man so much, but talk about the actions that have outraged us. Someone might actually listen if we talk about how disappointed we are with the fact that a political operative in the White House employed someone research the clubs that the applicants to the Justice Department Top Honors program, came up with a list of "Unrepublican" clubs (Nature Conservancy, Alliance for the Prevention of Domestic Abuse) and refused to even interview 28 of the 31 top graduates from the country's best law schools for jobs in the Justice Department based on what clubs some flunkie decided was a clue the person was a liberal.

Caveat: If the Siegelman allegations prove true, I take all of the above back.

I don't think Rove was all that great of an operative, but I do love that he gets under liberals' skin to the point of irrationality. And he's a fellow Sowalian, and offers diversity here that I'm sure is what Chickpea was saying this area lacks. Oh, and from some stories from Munngummry friends, Siegelman deserves to be tied upside down to a maypole, have his hair smothered in honey and placed in an ant bed while children laugh, dance and play around him. (edit- insert smilies here)

His commentary on Fox - very smart, very professional, very courteous, he never gets into any arguments. "I respectfully disagree" is a common phrase of his. He's really quite impressive.

His commentary on Fox - very smart, very professional, very courteous, he never gets into any arguments. "I respectfully disagree" is a common phrase of his. He's really quite impressive.

He just doesn't know how to break down Obama. I think his remarks show personal jealousy. Let's see "cooly arrogant"??? " Or how about this "Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."

That's weak. Pure sour grapes. Karl, you just go on revelling in your outsider status here in Sowal. Maybe someday a cool person will let you light his cigarette.

He just doesn't know how to break down Obama. I think his remarks show personal jealousy. Let's see "cooly arrogant"??? " Or how about this "Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He's the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by."

That's weak. Pure sour grapes. Karl, you just go on revelling in your outsider status here in Sowal. Maybe someday a cool person will let you light his cigarette.

He is reveling in outsider status and certainly remains inside many heads!

He is reveling in outsider status and certainly remains inside many heads!

Absolutely. It would be foolish to ignore him, but to identify with him is shameful and sad as well.

I am thinking maybe I need to hide my pictures and letters from Karl about what a great guy I am.

<groan>

And double groan. Pull your head out of where the sun don't shine. In many people's estimation, he has done nothing to warrant Congressional investigation. If the truth were known, its Congress that ought to be investigated.

I am thinking maybe I need to hide my pictures and letters from Karl about what a great guy I am.

Assuming what he says about you is true it doesn't look like you've rubbed off on him in the least.

And his lawishness was upheld 5-4 by the Supreme Court.

Which 5 to 4 decision was that? There have been so many lately I've lost track.

I am thinking maybe I need to hide my pictures and letters from Karl about what a great guy I am.

It was kinda freaky. Yesterday, while I was at your office, his eyes would follow me no matter where I went. Like a haunted portrait in a Scooby Doo episode :shock:

It was kinda freaky. Yesterday, while I was at your office, his eyes would follow me no matter where I went. Like a haunted portrait in a Scooby Doo episode :shock:

Karl always did seem well suited for the chamber of horrors in a wax museum.

It was kinda freaky. Yesterday, while I was at your office, his eyes would follow me no matter where I went. Like a haunted portrait in a Scooby Doo episode :shock:

Your with the media. He has his eyes on you all the time. I wonder how he feels now that he is a pundit instead of a quarterback. Probably just rich.