by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 21, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

efusing to allow his key strategist and deputy chief of staff Karl Rove to testify under oath before Congress, President George W. Bush dug in his heels, threatening to assert executive privilege. While no one's suppose to be above the law, a U.S. president comes awfully close. Executive privilege and pardons derive from the divine right of kings, where the sovereign can do as he pleases. When presidents, like Richard M. Nixon during Watergate or Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky mess, try to block access to incriminating information, courts typically settle the score. Both Nixon and Clinton ended up on the short end of the stick, eventually coughing up the subpoenaed information. Democrats want Bush's aides to testify under oath to get to the bottom of the controversial firing of eight U.S. attorneys, allegedly to preempt more GOP corruption scandals.

      Throwing Congress a bone, Bush OK'd private, non-taped, non-transcripted, non-oath interviews with former White House counselor Harriet Miers and Karl Rove, both with a hand in terminating federal prosecutors. Apart from politics, Democrats want to know whether political mischief played a part in firing, especially where Little Rock, Ark. U.S. attorney Bud Cummins was replaced by Rove's good friend, GOP operative Timothy Griffin. Bush accused Democrats of trying to “score political points,” dismissing the idea that Congress had a right to question aides under oath. “These extraordinary steps demonstrate a reasonable solution to the issue,” Bush told reporters, agreeing to only informal interviews. “However, we will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants,” said Bush, antagonizing Democrats viewing Rove as anything but “honorable.”

      Rove escaped indictment in the Valerie Plame affair, where Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby was convicted March 6 of perjury and obstruction of justice. Trial testimony revealed that Rove outed Plame to reporters on more than one occasion. Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald charged no one with breaking the federal law protecting the identities of undercover agents. Libby's attorney Ted Wells blamed the White House for throwing Libby under the bus to protect Rove. Exit interviews of some jurors wondered why Rove was left untouched. Rove finds himself in the middle of yet another controversy, raising questions about the integrity of the Justice Department. Bush dismissed the matter as typical Washington politics refusing to acknowledge whether White House aides engaged in political mischief.

      Bush has already released reams of memos and e-mails detailing conversations of White House officials connected on the subject of firing eight U.S. attorneys. Had executive privilege been a real issue, Bush would have refused any and all communications on the subject. That was the approach Cheney took when he claimed executive privilege over minutes of his 2001 Energy Task Force, where leaders in the energy field met to discuss energy policy. No one knows whether going after Iraqi oil was ever discussed. “The Justice Department with the approval of the White House, believed new leadership in these positions would better serve our country,” said Bush, admitting to White House involvement, calling the firings “normal and appropriate.” Allowing Rove or Miers to testify under oath would help clear the air for what Bush calls “normal and appropriate.”

      Bush's reluctance to allow Rove and Miers to testify before Congress involves more than preserving the powers of the executive branch. Like “Scooter” Libby, he knows that it's easy for loyal underlings to protect the “monarch,” even if it involves making up stories. Libby couldn't stomach either telling the truth or taking the fifth, both would have implicated Cheney. Should Rove or Miers take the stand, it wouldn't look good for embattled Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales, whose job hangs by a thread. “Testimony should be on the record and under oath. That's the formula for truce accountability,” said Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), begging the question of whether the White House wants to come clean. With Bush's popularity at an all-time low, he has no reason to acquiesce. No matter how unpopular, some believe he'll pardon Libby before he leaves office.

      Republicans dismiss the firings of eight U.S. attorneys as much ado about nothing. Bush is right when he says it was “normal and appropriate” for his administration to place fast-and-loose with the facts. Four years into the Iraq war, the White House faces no consequences for its flimsy case against Saddam, costing $500 billion and over 3,200 U.S. lives. With all the falsehoods about Iraq, Democrats in Congress are in no mood to give Bush a pass on the Justice Department scandal, hoping to hold the administration accountable for something. Offering Rove or Miers' testimony at informal hearings does nothing to clear the air. White House Counsel Fred F. Fielding conceived the offer as balancing between providing information and preserving the doctrine of executive privilege. For those watching the case, it's about an executive branch gone wild.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.