Scott Horton: Securing the Crime Scene
As Obama put the Holder nomination on the table, he received assurances from leading Republicans, including Judiciary Committee ranking member Arlen Specter, that, while there would be some questions about the Rich matter, Holder could expect smooth sailing. Suddenly, however, this has shifted, and it is increasingly clear why: Rove urged leading Senate Republicans to take on Holder. This weekend, we learn Rove’s advice was taken and Karl Rove had been tapped to serve as lead strategist in this effort. ...
... That, of course, is just politics. But there’s something fouler afoot here, I think. Karl Rove has his own agenda at Justice. The Senate Judiciary Committee’s report on the U.S. Attorneys scandal identified the individual whose manipulations produced the firings of eight of the country’s best U.S. Attorneys so they could be replaced with partisan hacks: Karl Rove. The Justice Department’s Inspector General hints at just the same conclusion, but notes that it was thwarted from completing its study by the refusal of Karl Rove and those who worked for him to cooperate with the probe. When the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Rove to testify on these same issues, and his nefarious role in the prosecution of Alabama Governor Don E. Siegelman, Rove failed to appear, chosing instead to vacation with post-Soviet Mafiosi at a Crimean resort favored by Stalin. Now a special prosecutor is looking closely into Rove’s dealings and speculation that he may face criminal charges mounts.
Given Sepcter's role in the US Attorney's scandal, he too has a huge interest in the cover up.
- DCblogger's blog
- Login or register to post comments



Front page

Comments
they don't even need Rove--
they know what's important in their view-- it's never us, rights, laws, jobs, opportunity, health, homes, etc -- anything that's good for the majority.
they cheered when they stopped SCHIP expansion. they cheered when they killed the Auto loan. they cheer at their own evil work always--and don't need Rove.
Obstructed good things -- and forcing their agenda thru -- are their only goals --and so far they've been wildly successful still--and will continue to be, tragically--especially as long as Obama and Congress refuse to force a better agenda thru.
Holder, tho, is no prize nor a threat to them, but simply a symbol of their power to stop what Dems or Obama wants -- that's why they're making a big deal of him, as opposed to other cabinet appointees. Holder and Obama will never punish anyone involved in the DOJ crimes, and they know it.
My Prediction: Rove, et al, threaten Holder's nomination
and the Obama administration, filled with their so-called bipartisan fervor, will offer a compromise so Holder will be approved. And I'm betting the compromise will include letting all the bad guys go free for their crimes at the DOJ and beyond (including Gitmo torture, telecom spying, etc.). The rat-fucking begins and there will be wild cheering from the kool-aid drinkers (including my dear friend who tells me EVERYTHING WILL GET BETTER now that we have a black president). The Overton window will have moved so far right it jams, but the fauxgresives will still be celebrating their center-right Reaganite as the most 'gressive EVAH! Sadly, those of us who are progressive or liberal will be ignored as roundly as we were during the Reagan years as Republican bipartisanship ("date-rape", as they like to think of it) flourishes again.
Rove has created his permanent Republican majority. The joke, though, on all of us with any liberal sensibilities, is that he did it with Democrats.
Like matter and anti-matter, Republicans and the truth are unable to occupy the same space.
the appearance of a compromise
is what it would be, since they already have made clear they have no intention at all to actually apply the law to political criminals of the current administration.
Appearance is everything
to the fauxgressive arm of the Democratic party. Form over substance has been Obama's hallmark all along. Why else would a "present" vote be taken as a sign of support for women's control of their own bodies? Would a real supporter say he believes queer rights should be protected, yet go to great lengths to refuse to appear in the same room (much less same photo) as SF's Mayor Newsom? Feh!
Like matter and anti-matter, Republicans and the truth are unable to occupy the same space.
yup--& you just reminded me--
appearance over substance for us especially --
First gay contingent to march in inaugural parade; lesbian named to White House post
(she's the only openly gay person so far appointed, and it's for a "Council" -- and not for a Dept or Agency position, nor as part of a Cabinet appointee's inner circle)
and the marching band leads the headline, of course--as if it means he's good for us, which he's not. : <
Yes! We can entertain, but
we still don't get to be treated like people when it comes to civil rights. I'm hoping the band calls him out for failing to stand up for our civil rights, but I don't think the hope bong is gonna make that happen in the land of reality.
Like matter and anti-matter, Republicans and the truth are unable to occupy the same space.
i wish
but it would never happen, sadly.
Throwing ruby slippers at Obama would be perfect too, i'd say. (like that Iraqi did to Bush) ; >
Oh! Fab idea!
I know lots of queers who are mad as spit at Obama and his lack of support against Prop 8, but I don't know a single queen who would be willing to give up her ruby slippers, even in exchange for throwing them at Obama.
Like matter and anti-matter, Republicans and the truth are unable to occupy the same space.
Rove is good news!
Look how great he left the Republican Party, he nearly ruined it. If the Dems concede its out of their own free will. The public is on the Dems side no matter what the GOP does and any conservative policy failures are the sole responsibility of the Dems, not Rove or the GOP. Clinton was willing to shut down the government to prevent GOP policies. Obama doesn't even have to worry about that.
Holder is so not a prize--
Eric Holder and Chiquita
Agreed! Better choice would be
someone like Elizabeth Holtzman (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_H...)
who has a history of working in public and private sector and in elective office. Of course, I'd also like to see her take over Senator Clinton's term of office in the Senate.
Like matter and anti-matter, Republicans and the truth are unable to occupy the same space.
it'll never be anyone
not totally pro-corporation -- even if Holder is rejected.
Obama would probably pick Sunstein -- or worse.
Cass Sunstein will be his nominee
for the Supreme Court. Obama said during the primary that he'd like to see someone like Cass on the Supreme Court. Makes perfect sense to me because it's a very short trip to go from simply voting present on a woman's right to choose to negotiating Roe v Wade into something even anti-abortionists can love, as Sunstein has suggested.
Like matter and anti-matter, Republicans and the truth are unable to occupy the same space.
that's even worse--Att'y Generals come and go--
the Supremes are for life.
: <