Bush Attorney, DOJ in Intense Talks Over Rove's Congressional Testimony       
By Jason Leopold   
The Public Record

Thursday, 19 February 2009 17:07

<http://www.pubrecord.org/law/697-bush-attorney-doj-in-intense-talks-over-roves-congressional-testimony-.html>http://www.pubrecord.org/law/697-bush-attorney-doj-in-intense-talks-over-roves-congressional-testimony-.html

The Justice Department and White House lawyers are engaged in intense 
negotiations with attorneys for George W. Bush and three of his 
former advisers over demands that they testify before Congress and 
turn over documents about their alleged roles in the firings of nine 
U.S. Attorneys in 2006, according to court papers filed Thursday, 
lawmakers who serve on the House Judiciary Committee, and the House 
Counsel.

It's unclear how negotiations are shaping up, but White House Counsel 
Gregory Craig, Bush's lawyer Emmett Flood and House Counsel Irv 
Nathan indicated they may soon reach some sort of deal that will see 
former Bush adviser Karl Rove testify before the House Judiciary 
Committee, which issued a third subpoena to him this week. Whether 
Rove will testify about the U.S. Attorney firings is unknown and 
whether he was offered a deal of sorts in exchange for his testimony 
is a possibility, lawmakers knowledgeable about the talks said.

Recently, Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, told House Judiciary 
Committee Chairman John Conyers that Rove would testify about the 
alleged political prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman 
but the not the firings about the federal prosecutors. Conyers 
rejected that offer in writing and subpoenaed Rove to appear before 
the Judiciary Committee for a deposition Monday.

Additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered 
the Obama administration to file legal briefs by Feb. 25 stating 
whether it intended to back Bush's extraordinary claims of executive 
privilege involving the testimony of two other advisers, ex-White 
House Counsel Harriet Miers and former Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, 
who were held in contempt of Congress last year for refusing to 
testify about the U.S. Attorney firings.

Last week, the DOJ asked the appeals court to delay until March 4 a 
deadline for the Obama administration to file legal briefs while 
negotiations played out. The appeals court formally rejected that 
request Thursday.

The appeals court balked at pleas by Acting Assistant Attorney 
General Michael Hertz to allow the administration more time to 
negotiate a settlement due to "complicated and time consuming 
discussions" involving "sensitive separation-of-powers questions 
presented in this appeal."

If a deal is not reached by Wednesday and the Justice Department 
fails to file a brief stating its position the appeals court 
indicated it may press ahead with sanctions against the Justice 
Department.

Craig, the White House counsel, issued a statement last week stating 
that Obama has encouraged all sides to enter into a settlement and 
avoid a prolonged legal battle.

"The President is very sympathetic to those who want to find out what 
happened," Craig said. "But he is also mindful as President of the 
United States not to do anything that would undermine or weaken the 
institution of the presidency. So, for that reason, he is urging both 
sides of this to settle."

Hertz added that "the inauguration of a new President has altered the 
dynamics of this [Miers-Bolten] case and created new opportunities 
for compromise rather than litigation."

In court papers filed last week by the DOJ seeking the two-week 
delay, the DOJ said, "these tripartite discussions have been 
complicated and time-consuming. The requested 14-day extension is 
appropriate to permit these negotiations an opportunity to succeed, 
potentially obviating the need for this Court to address the 
sensitive separation-of-powers questions presented in this appeal."

Obama's position suggests he may support some form of executive 
privilege as asserted by ex-President Bush over Rove's testimony. On 
the campaign trail he said

The settlement talks also include whether internal White House 
documents, such as e-mails, held by Bolten and Miers will be turned 
over to Congress. It's unclear whether Conyers is satisfied with the 
pace of the negotiations. His office declined to comment on the 
matter.

Bad-Faith Negotiations

Last year, similar talks between Congress and the Bush administration 
over Bolten's and Miers's testimony were attempted. Then-White House 
Counsel Fred Fielding wrote to Conyers requesting a meeting, saying 
the White House was interested in working "cooperatively to resolve 
these issues."

However, the talks proved fruitless and Nathan, the House counsel, 
characterized the negotiations as "completely useless."

"We have not found willing partners on the other side of the table," 
Nathan said in federal court hearing last year. "We're being dunced 
around here."

U.S. District Judge John Bates, a Bush appointee, agreed that the 
White House was not negotiating in good faith and was simply trying 
to run out the clock.

"Had the litigants indicated that a negotiated solution was 
foreseeable in the near future, the Court may have stayed its hand in 
the hope that further intervention in this dispute by the Article III 
branch [the Judiciary] would not be necessary," Bates wrote.

Under a Democratic administration, negotiations may end up being more 
acceptable to Democrats in Congress. But thus far, Conyers does not 
appear to be satisfied with the direction of the negotiations - and 
Obama could come under criticism for supporting continued Bush 
secrecy.

During Campaign 2008, Obama said Bush was overreaching with his 
claims of executive privilege. Then, on his first full day in office, 
Obama signed an executive order reining in the power of former 
presidents to keep their historical records secret.

Obama directed the National Archives and Records Administration to 
consult with the Justice Department and White House counsel 
"concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the 
former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the 
presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege."

Now, however, Obama's Justice Department is pushing Congress to reach 
some accommodation with the Bush administration's executive privilege 
claims.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
newsfromunderground-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to