Grand Jury Getting Closer to Rove

/in /by

From Murray, over at TPM:

Karl Rove will cooperate with a federal criminal inquiry underway into the firings of nine U.S. attorneys and has already spoken to investigators in a separate, internal DOJ investigation into the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, his attorney said in an interview.

Rove previously refused to cooperate with an earlier Justice Department inquiry into the firings. The Justice Department’s Inspector General and its Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) said in a report released last September detailing their earlier probe of the firings of the U.S. attorneys that their investigation was severely "hindered" by the refusal by Rove and other senior Bush administration officials to cooperate with the probe.

Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, said that Rove, however, will cooperate with a federal criminal probe of the firings being led by Nora Dannehy, the Acting U.S. Attorney for Connecticut who was selected by former Attorney General Michael Mukasey to lead the investigation. Dannehy has recently empaneled a federal grand jury to hear evidence in the matter.

Luskin told me that Rove had earlier not cooperated with the Inspector General and OPR probe into the firings because "it was not his [Karl’s] call… it was not up to us decide." Luskin said that Rove was directed by the Bush White House counsel’s office not to cooperate with the Inspector General and OPR.

Regarding the more recent probe by Dannehy, Luskin said: "I can say that he would cooperate with the Dannehy investigation if asked."

In recent days, according to legal sources, two former Bush White House officials, including one former aide to Rove, have been contacted by investigators working for Dannehy and asked for interviews. One of the two has agreed to be interviewed.

Note, at least according to this, Rove has not yet been asked to talk to the grand jury–two former White House staffers have. If I had to guess, I’d say Sara Taylor (who was a Rove aide) and Chris Oprison or William Kelley (who both worked in the White House Counsel office) are good candidates for the two officials who have already been contacted by Dannehy’s investigation (Scott Jennings is another Rove aide who testified). Taylor, of course, previously shielded much of her testimony before the Senate by invoking executive privilege (which was when Bush panicked and made sure Harriet wouldn’t undergo the same process). 

image_print
    • stryder says:

      Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, said that Rove, however, will cooperate with a federal criminal probe of the firings being led by Nora Dannehy, the Acting U.S. Attorney for Connecticut who was selected by former Attorney General Michael Mukasey to lead the investigation

      Gee it must be nice to dictate the procedures,conditions,time,place and people who’ll you testify to

  3. sojourner says:

    So, with a new sheriff in town (Holder), Rove is suddenly a law-abiding citizen and will cooperate. Amazing! Where is his loyalty to Bush? On the other hand, I just can’t imagine him giving in so easily. Is he laying another turd someplace for Holder to step in?

      • FrankProbst says:

        Turdblossom has likely made a deal with Fredo for some of his memory pills.

        You know, the eraser ones.

        Probably, but that’s why they go for the smaller fish first. And that defense didn’t work out so well for Scooter Libby.

  5. MaryCh says:

    Every time I’ve seen a headline like this (going way back into the Plame-pffft), I think of a Far Side cartoon with a dog hiding in the laundry, ‘cat fud’ signs posted pointing to the dryer, an inquisitive tabby, and the dog saying ‘oh please, oh please…’

    • behindthefall says:

      I have a mug with that cartoon. Also the housebound cat with only daytime soaps to watch who is plastered up against the picture window: outside two trucks have collided — Al’s Small Flightless Birds and Bob’s Assorted Rodents; little creatures are wandering around while the two drivers have it out.

  6. ShotoJamf says:

    Turdblossum doesn’t just roll over. He and his attorneys are up to something. A deal, maybe? With whom and for what? Unless the case is an absolute lock, and Rove is truly afraid of going to jail… And I don’t see that yet.

  7. jackie says:

    I think Rove is going for the ‘Ollie North’ deal. He doesn’t seem to have too many options left.

    • LabDancer says:

      That raises a fun point; perversely so, but nonetheless. You’ll recall that Ollie, faced with go quietly, go long and GFY chose to meld the last two & thereby built himself up into a winger legend. Critical to the strategy, tho, was to project himself as having some wierd variation on ‘integrity’ [of the sort in much demand among the unitard set] in saying, in effect: yeah, you got me coppers, dead to rights: I’m guilty alright – – guilty of blind godfearing redwhiteandblue patriotism!

      At this point, such is Karl’s general reputation that were he to admit guilt on anything at all, there’d be a lot of concern it was just a trick.

      • Hmmm says:

        Dunno ’bout that, I don’t really see Da Rover as able to pull off a Nixonian, “Secret Honor” vibe.

  8. jayt says:

    Now that Holder is in, isn’t it a rather normal first-order-of-business that all existing USA’s are asked to proffer their resignations?

  9. Bluetoe2 says:

    Sorry to be OT so early but thought everyone would want to know that according to NBC’s Chuck Todd the Republicans have won the spin are on the stimulus package. With what passes for the 4th Estate in the U.S. who is really surprised?

    • plunger says:

      Chuck Todd – telling people what to think – on behalf of the boys back at Rockefeller Center. He’s clearly been assigned the role of attack dog in the White House Press Corps. By whom?

      Of note is that no one assumed that role during the Bush Administration.

      That’s where the real news lies. Who holds that power?

      Dissecting the real agenda, one apparent coincidence at a time…

  12. MadDog says:

    And more totally OT comes an IPS news article entitled

    “Generals Seek to Reverse Obama Withdrawal Decision
    (h/t to John Cole over at Balloon Juice for the heads-up:

    CENTCOM commander Gen. David Petraeus, supported by Defence Secretary Robert Gates, tried to convince President Barack Obama that he had to back down from his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq within 16 months at an Oval Office meeting Jan. 21.

    But Obama informed Gates, Petraeus and Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen that he wasn’t convinced and that he wanted Gates and the military leaders to come back quickly with a detailed 16-month plan, according to two sources who have talked with participants in the meeting.

    Obama’s decision to override Petraeus’s recommendation has not ended the conflict between the president and senior military officers over troop withdrawal, however. There are indications that Petraeus and his allies in the military and the Pentagon, including Gen. Ray Odierno, now the top commander in Iraq, have already begun to try to pressure Obama to change his withdrawal policy.

    A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama’s decision.

    Petraeus was visibly unhappy when he left the Oval Office, according to one of the sources. A White House staffer present at the meeting was quoted by the source as saying, “Petraeus made the mistake of thinking he was still dealing with George Bush instead of with Barack Obama…”

    (My bold)

    You should read the entire IPS news article because it gets even worse. Something pretty close to outright insubordination and disobeyal of orders.

    This was one of my predictions over at Pat Lang’s Sic Semper Tyrannis blog last fall when Bush tried to tie the incoming Obama Administration’s hands by moving General Petraeus in as Admiral Fallon’s replacement at CENTCOM, and also moving up Odierno to fill Petraeus’s vacancy in Iraq.

    I guess we’ll find out over the course of time just who is in charge.

      • MadDog says:

        You can bet the farm on Repugs in Congress making this their latest battle cry. They always have. China, Korea, Vietnam.

        They will turn Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld failure in Iraq into “Obama loses the Iraq War”.

        Why? Because they can!

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Well, there’s a huge camp invested career-wise, financially, and emotionally in putting this on Obama. Here’s hoping that Obama has a ‘mind like water’ and outplays Petraeus here. But it’s not simply a test of Obama; this looks like a huge test for Biden and Rahm, as well.

          I know that there are others around here interested in what historian Andrew Bacevich (”The Limits To Power”, former FDL Book Salon guest) has to say on the limits of military power. He’s at the TPM Book Cafe this week for those interested in more on this whole topic of the uses (and limitations) of military power: http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsme…..residency/

          • Hmmm says:

            If there’s really a schism there then its not mano-a-mano with just Petraeus on the other side, it’s the whole frickin’ MIC.

            • RevBev says:

              Exactly because they have to make all that money, like Halliburton, et al.
              All that hardware…get the word out.

            • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

              Indeed, schism does look like what’s quite likely brewing.
              Consider that Shinseki won’t likely be supporting Petraeus’ claims, being busy helping injured vets and all.

              And look at how many prominent retired military supported Obama in Aug at the Dem convention. (That still blows my mind.) And didn’t DoD Sec Gates argue that DoS needs to take more responsibility for many ‘nation building’ type tasks, and the military wanted more emphasis on diplomacy all around the globe?

              So on the diplomacy front, Obama gives them what they say they want, and it now appears that Petraeus is pissed? This looks like one thread to keep an eye on.

            • acquarius74 says:

              Thanks, Hmmm, and all commenters on this subject.

              Question: Does this conflict remind anyone of JFK’s stand against the military/CIA/industrialists stand-off about the Vietnam war? You know how that turned out…..

              Reference: book: JFK and the Unspeakable, by James W. Douglass. There is also a 58 minute video (very good) of a talk given by the author. I’ll get the link and give it later.

        • freepatriot says:

          They will turn Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld failure in Iraq into “Obama loses the Iraq War”.

          I wouldn’t be so sure they can, now

          that boat sailed already

    • freepatriot says:

      hard to believe their is a group of people who are collectively more stupid that the repuglitard party as a whole

      A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama’s decision.

      good luck with that

      ever heard of McArthur ???

      I also heard that david duke is gonna lead a revolt within the repuglitard party, and lead 90% of the repuglitards in forming a new party. So what is 90% of 30% (I hate math)

      this beats fitzmas all to hell …

      • FrankProbst says:

        A network of senior military officers is also reported to be preparing to support Petraeus and Odierno by mobilising public opinion against Obama’s decision.

        good luck with that

        My thoughts exactly. But I really hope they try it.

    • bmaz says:

      I have seen this movie before, and did not like the General James Matoon Scott character the first time. And Burt Lancaster is a hell of a lot more compelling than the freaking weasel Petraeus.

    • bobschacht says:

      Let’s see. Does this fit right in with Petraeus’s appearance at teh Superb Owl? Yeah, I know the Owl was held in FL, which is where CENTCOM is located these days– how convenient for Petraus.

      Well, Preznit Bush always said he was just following the advice of his Generals (while firing/retiring the generals he didn’t agree with). Is it time for Obama to do the same thing?

      Is there a machismo match being conducted here, to test Obama’s mettle?

      Bob in HI

      • RevBev says:

        Are there odds? I do not think one would lightly mess with Obama, IMO. I am guessing he is way smarter than Pet.

      • prostratedragon says:

        Let’s see. Does this fit right in with Petraeus’s appearance at teh Superb Owl? Yeah, I know the Owl was held in FL, which is where CENTCOM is located these days– how convenient for Petraus.

        Thanks! It did strike me that Prez wasted no time at all calling the Superb Owl champs. Figured that, since his predecessor made such a deal of doing things like that, he wanted to get in another clean break asap. But this adds a dimension.

    • rkilowatt says:

      The MacArthur Brothers MacPetraeus and MacGates are mavericks. They don’t need no stinkin’ Commander-in-Chief.

  13. Hmmm says:

    Ya gotta admit it fits with the recent escalation of Limbaugh, the holder of the biggest repugli-megaphone.

  14. BayStateLibrul says:

    I heard that Luskin is on a three week trip to Europe…
    He’s making a mint in billable hours for Karl…
    I’d love to see Rove’s tax return to see if Karl is writing off his legal expenses as a cost of doing business, bad and evil business practices…

    • bobschacht says:

      Maybe he’s looking for someplace that would accept Rove without arresting him for anything. And that does not have an extradition treaty with the U.S. I dunno. Estonia?

      Bob in HI

  15. solai says:

    I love knowing that Bush’s thugs are facing legal problems. Hopefully they’ll all be bankrupted then imprisoned.
    And Gonzo made my day when he said that Bush’s last words to him were “Stay strong”. Ha. Must be Gonzo’s going through hell. And that stupid fuck, Gonzo, actually thought that was endearing. What an ass. Bush walks into the sunset while his minions face the firing squad, but what a guy, he actually tried to comfort those he used.

  16. LabDancer says:

    Slightly OT. With the end of the long national nightmare, the healing begins: Schedule a hockey game, and guess what breaks out?

    http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=…..re=related

    Lifted from Moscow on the Hudson: “America – what a concept; what a great town!”

    • skdadl says:

      Interesting question (although your links are not working for me), and EW will probably have the best answer.

      I’ve never seen Ralston in action, but Taylor before the SJC is seared into memory. In response to Senator Whitehouse: “[babble babble] I’m sorry: what was your qweschun?” And then there was Leahy’s eloquent lesson to her about her oath, not to the president but to the constitution. That was almost as good as when he thundered back at Bradley Schlozman: “But they DO.”

      LabDancer @ 41: lol. I’m a Canuck and I can spell Blagojevich, but that’s because I pal around with you guys.

    • emptywheel says:

      Shouldn’t be. Ralston was gone before the PATRIOT provision was even put into the Patriot Act.

      And Ralston is a different figure, different scandal. She was the liaison to the Abramoff/selling government project. Taylor had ties to that, but her role here was in setting up meetings with the NM Republicans who wanted Iglesias fired and making sure they were made happy.

  19. WilliamOckham says:

    Btw, the best part of this article is that Waas is writing at TPM Muckraker. I hope this is the start of something big

  21. donc35 says:

    IANAL, but can Karl talk to Dannehy, give vauge and misleading answers he has to wade through for six months to prove they are asshat, then tell Congess “Hey I can’t talk about that, becauase of other investigations”?

  22. orionATL says:

    say,

    when are all the u.s. attorneys going to resign becasue there is a new president?

    back when the u.s. attorney firings was a big item we were assurred that firing (actually asking for their resignation) u.s. attorneys, all of them, was a routine matter. every president did it we were told.

    will our current herd of u.s. A’s be fired when holder is in place?

    or was that earlier confident asertion just one more bit of slick republican sophistry?

  23. rkilowatt says:

    re Sara Taylor being corrected that her oath to the President was actually to the Constitution.

    Per her blogged testimony, she did not acknowledge that she mis-spoke.

    That string should be pulled: Did you take an oath to the President? What oath and who administered it?

  24. rkilowatt says:

    OT Iran sends first home-built satellite into orbit.

    http://www.google.com/hostedne…..s27QdfjEYg

    “In Washington, State Department spokesman Robert Wood said the satellite programme could ‘possibly lead to the development of ballistic missiles.’”

    …and possibly to production of linoleum and possibly growth of giant pistachios and possibly a demonstration of competence.