by Katie Fretland and updated
There was an empty chair at a House Judiciary subcommittee today and a placard with Karl Rove's name, but there was no Rove.
The former White House deputy chief of staff refused an order to testify about the firing of federal prosecutors and allegations of selective prosecution of Democrats seen as political opponents.
Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) had threatened to hold Rove in contempt, following an assertion by Rove lawyer Robert Luskin that he would not appear.
Luskin wrote in a July 9 letter that Rove is immune from compelled congressional testimony as a former close presidential advisor whose "testimony is sought in connection with his official duties." Luskin said Rove would be willing to participate in an informal interview. Rove would also agree to give written responses to questions about the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, who was convicted on corruption charges, Luskin said.
Fred F. Fielding, counsel to the president, wrote in a letter to Luskin that the Department of Justice advised that Rove is immune from prosecution.
"...Constitutional immunity exists to protect the institution of the presidency, and numerous administrations--Republican and Democratic--have shared this position," he wrote.
"...Mr. Rove is not required to appear in response to the Committee's subpoena. Accordingly the president has directed him not to do so."
However Conyers and Sanchez said that Rove's refusal could subject him to contempt proceedings.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
UPDATE: The Judiciary subcommittee rejected Rove's claim to privilege
"Mr. Rove's absence today is an insult to the American people and to the system of checks and balances that are the basis of our constitution and our democracy," said Conyers. "I applaud Chairwoman Sánchez's ruling rejecting his overreaching claim of immunity. And as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I will seriously consider all available options to obtain Mr. Rove's testimony as required by the subpoena. Whatever path we take, the end result must be the same: the full restoration of our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no one-- not the President and certainly not Karl Rove -- is above the law."
"By failing to appear in defiance of a subpoena, Mr. Rove, his attorney and the White House are trying to run away from an investigation that's about one thing: ensuring justice is dispensed free of fear or favor," said Sánchez. "Mr. Rove is not above the law and Congress will assert its constitutional role to serve as a check on the power of the executive branch."
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Here I thought we were a nation of laws. I guess it depends on who your friends are !! If he gets away with this refusal to testify, America will lose some of her luster. We have always prided ourselves in the rule of law, or at least the appearance of that rule, but his guy is thumbing his nose at even the pretense !! This Bush administration will go down as the worst, ever !!! I don't think he cares, though, so the beat will go on, especially if the Lobbyist's darling, Senator McCain wins the Presidency!! There is a real American disaster, in the making, even worse than the disaster in New Orleans and that was bad enough !!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE AND WHOLE. NOW.
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, Chicago | July 10, 2008 2:11 PM
Shame on Bush and Rove! America ought to be outraged by this total disregard for the United States Congress and the rule of law. Bush has operated as though the Justice department belongs to him and the Republican party. I hope every american stands up and hold them accountable for this unpatriotic act.
Posted by: Jack | July 10, 2008 2:38 PM
Posted by: Don Fitzgerald, Chicago | July 10, 2008 2:11 PM
Posted by: Jack | July 10, 2008 2:38 PM
Were you both as equally outraged and indignant with Clintons claim of executive privilige during the Monica Lewinsky embarassment?
Executive privilege is not to be taken lightly and is meant to provide protection from an overzealous congress from dragging presidential aides into under oath testimony - when in some cases this may violate constitutional balance of powers. Without this privilige, cabinet members or other direct advisors could be influenced or intimidated into not being able to do their job effectivley.
In any event this has been the path this do nothing congress has typically followed- fishing expeditions, special prosecutors and other grandstanding stunts...
Posted by: heartburn | July 10, 2008 3:24 PM
What part of "seperation of powers" don't you folks get? Jack, the Justice Department is part of the executive branch, and does "belong" to this president, and any other president. Privileged communication and protection from excessive congressional interference is yet another fundamental constitutional principle, which, in this case, serves to protect the executive branch from excessive political interference (read witch hunt) from congress. Shame on you for not knowing any better!
Posted by: Addison Ingle | July 10, 2008 3:34 PM
What part of "seperation of powers" don't you folks get? Jack, the Justice Department is part of the executive branch, and does "belong" to this president, and any other president.
Posted by: Addison Ingle | July 10, 2008 3:34 PM
*********************************
Wrong! wrong! wrong! The Judiciary doesn't belong to the Executive branch, but stands separate and its responsibilities are to insure the rule of law and the Constitution, not the protection of a corrupt administration.
You need to go back and study the Constitution (checks and balances) before you make any judgment calls on others. The shame is on you!
Posted by: the truth | July 10, 2008 4:16 PM
Truth-----
The Department of Justice is part of the Executive Branch. The Judiciary is one of the three branches of the federal system, as in the Executive, Congress, and the judiciary.
Shame on you!
Posted by: Addison Ingle | July 10, 2008 4:39 PM
Addison, Truth,
Yep, DoJ is administered by the AG, who's appointed by the President and is in the Cabinet.
The real issue is that "executive privilege" has taken this administration to new lows and the USA along with it. Now are you wondering what Cheney had to say in his energy roundtables? And what does Rove have to say on the Hill? Safe bet we can assume the worst.
Legal? Yes. Ethical? Hell no.
Posted by: Kenny Bunkport☮ | July 10, 2008 5:17 PM
Heartburn., I hardly (as did most Americans at the time) think a stain on an over ambitious girls blue dress compares to the illegal and un constitutional STAINS of the current administrations actions the past 8 years. I guess having sex is unconstitutional in your book.
What you right wing puritanical hypocrites did to Clinton embarrased the United States around the world! Nobody, and I mean nobldy anywhere else in the world gave a hoot about who Clinton slept with or not. What mattered was what he did for America and the rest of the world.
What Karl Rove and Bush have done and continue to do has disgraced our country's reputation with the world comunity.
Posted by: Scot S. Blakeley | July 10, 2008 5:26 PM
Please refer to organizational chart of the federal system below.* While you are right about the Department of Justice, you are disregarding the fact that the Judiciary is a separate entity created by the Constitution to make certain that there is no infringement of the Executive branch on the rule of law (Judicial review).
The Department of Justice (Attorney General's Office) may be answerable to the Executive Branch for their appointments, but as in the case of Alberto Gonzales, the Legislative branch is there to make certain that there are checks and balances or otherwise, the Executive Branch would be nothing more than a oligarchy.
The preceding was a shameless display of intelligent thought.
*http://www.washlaw.edu/doclaw/orgchart/mainog.html
Posted by: the truth | July 10, 2008 5:33 PM
Wow! The man is above the law? Let's united on get this person.
Posted by: Alan Howland | July 10, 2008 6:17 PM
"...Mr. Rove is not required to appear in response to the Committee's subpoena. Accordingly the president has directed him not to do so."
However Conyers and Sanchez said that Rove's refusal could subject him to contempt proceedings.
~ K.F.
democrats democrats democrats, u have to get a grip. I know that ya gotta get Karl Rove at any cost, but as of this moment, HE HAS NOT BROKEN ANY LAW, and therefore has to be gotten on some other bogus whatnot.
Listening to these democrat windbags in Congress has gotten many of you confused. They are part of the JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, a Congressional committee. NOT the JUDICIARY Branch of Government, and NOT the JUSTICE Department. They don't have any specific Constitutional granted power to indulge themselves in this stupid continuous game of lowbrow politics. I know that you gotta get Karl Rove but you just have to slow down your roll.
I will not be here for the usual rabid dog attack-backs becuz the hour of the Pretty Tx Latinas has arrived. No truncated sinusoidal waves. True High Definition Cinemascope.
I love this highly refined country of laws. I love this hotter than July itself, state.
Posted by: Django Scott - Houston Tx | July 10, 2008 6:51 PM
Okay, he doesn't like our government's system of checks and balances--THEN PUT HIM ON A PLANE AND EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION HIM TO THE HAGUE.
Follow with Rice, Rummy, Wolfowitz Cheney and Bush, Jr.
Careful, Alan--Obama's FISA bill is gonna gitcha!
Posted by: man without a country or a conscienc | July 10, 2008 7:12 PM
the truth wrote:
"The Judiciary doesn't belong to the Executive branch, but stands separate and its responsibilities are to insure the rule of law and the Constitution, not the protection of a corrupt administration."
-----------------------------------------
the truth, what does the judiciary have to do with this subpoena? This is a congressional subpoena to a (former) member of the executive branch. Regarding this subpoena, the judiciary has not been involved.
Posted by: Herbie H. | July 10, 2008 7:28 PM
Whitaker Chambers,awaken!
The Obama Truth Commission will subpoena all the bad guys: Rover, Wolfowicz, Perle , Feith , Abrams.
BushBoy will be long gone.
Y'all will have to tell the truth then, or go to jail.
Remember what Col. Jessup said:
You can't handle the truth.
Posted by: ornery | July 10, 2008 9:40 PM
I'm glad Karl Rove won't testify to a Congress committee headed by John Conyers. W is right to assert executive privilege. Rove has said he will come informally. Conyers is a partisan Bush basher.
He is looking for Rove to stumble. Conyers made his assistant baby sit for his kids on government time.He has his own skeletons in the closet.
The Dem Congress has an approval rate of 8 percent the lowest of any Congress in history.They are partisan hacks.
The Dems have had over 1,000 oversight hearings to bash Bush.They are obstructionists like poster Don Fitzgerald who must work for Obama.
Karl Rove is a great American! Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | July 11, 2008 10:09 AM