Let's Make a Deal-WH pushes for an agreement to require Rove, Miers to testify on prosecutor firings

[kpete]

Source: Newsweek

Let's Make a Deal

White House pushes for an agreement to require Rove, Miers to testify on prosecutor firings.
By Michael Isikoff | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Mar 4, 2009

President Obama's White House lawyers played a critical behind-the-scenes role in brokering an agreement that requires George W. Bush's former aides Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify before Congress about the mass firings of U.S. attorneys, according to congressional and White House sources.

Obama's aides were anxious to put a stop to an ongoing court battle over executive privilege that could have backfired on them, said the sources, who asked not to be identified talking about sensitive matters.

The active involvement of Obama White House counsel Gregory Craig and his associates in pushing for a settlement shows how stark positions taken during the campaign often look different when a new president has taken office. As a candidate last year, Obama sharply criticized the Bush administration for making sweeping claims of executive privilege to shield testimony about the U.S. attorney firings. "This blanket notion that you can't subpoena White House aides where there's evidence of genuine wrongdoing I think is completely misguided," he said last year.

But if the dispute over executive privilege hadn't been settled by Wednesday night, Obama's lawyers would have been put in the uncomfortable position of having to defend Rove and Miers in court. The alternative would have been to accept the possibility of a judicial ruling that might have impinged on the confidentiality of their own discussions about sensitive issues should those discussions later become the subject of congressional investigations.

Read more: http://www.newsweek.com/id/187652

[peace13]

1. I would love to have the fired prosecutors be in charge of this investigation.

Let's put the people who were at the heart of this debacle in charge of finding the answers.

[bertman]

2. Nice thought isn't it? But unfortunately a major conflict of interest. Not that that would

slow down a Republican administration.

Rec

[Lance_Boyle]

3. Greg Craig wants a settlement for his CLIENT Karl Rove. Imagine that.

Give Craig the boot NOW, then disbar the dishonorable jackass.

[TacticalPeek]

4. Oh, that Greg Craig.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5185239&mesg_id=5185239

[acmavm]

8. Yeah, that one...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5185239&mesg_id=5186745

[flyarm]

5. Testimony "NOT UNDER OATH"

http://www.newsweek.com/id/187652/page/2

Let's Make a Deal

However, Conyers' press release and CBS's report both state that public testimony may or may not follow the depositions.

And Newsweek says the depositions will be transcribed but not given under oath:

Then, after the documents are reviewed, Rove and Miers will be questioned in private by lawyers for the Judiciary Committee, with a transcript of the interviews made. But their testimony will not be given under oath and it will not be in public—at least not initially.

The judiciary panel will have the right to call the witnesses again later to testify in public if they wish, though this seems unlikely in the case of Miers; her former position as White House counsel will allow her to invoke some attorney-client privileges. House lawyers say the fact that the witnesses will not be testifying under oath is not particularly significant because they can still be criminally charged with making false statements to a congressional committee if it can be proved that they lied.

[Jefferson23]

6. snip from above:

"The alternative would have been to accept the possibility of a judicial ruling that might have impinged on the confidentiality of their own discussions about sensitive issues should those discussions later become the subject of congressional investigations."

Yea, well that would have been just too damn bad for Obama. This is the WRONG way to lead a nation imo.

[WyldRogue]

7. yep...

Seems like the Code of Laws and Rule of Laws only apply to us lowly taxpayers whilst the 'elites' get off scott free...

And all I hear is 'wait, Obama is up to something so don't rush to a conclusion' but this isn't the time to be playing games. Crimes WERE committed and him and his Administration knows it, all the sane US citizens knows this, hell, the WHOLE damn world knows this but somehow, I do not understand why Obama and Congress keep balking at prosecuting the criminals...