Rove was neck deep in the Justice Department, the politics, and the US Attorney firings
Two clips from NYTimes articles point to a far deeper Rove involvement than the White House has previously stated.
See, they just forgot he was involved. They didn't lie to Congress. They "provided inaccurate information." It's an understandable mistake. It's not like Rove "exercises unusually broad influence."
Bring him in. Put him under oath.
(All these examples "came out" right before the hearings tomorrow where Sampson is to testify. This is an awful lot of specific detail for either a leak or emails. I would think that this is the White House trying to immunize before tomorrow. They may know what the Dems are bringing to the hearing.)
UPDATE: The AP has different euphemisms for lying. "erred in asserting," "certain statements... appeared to be contradicted by department documents included in our production."
We wouldn't know about any of this if the Dems had "taken their word."
Bring 'em in. Under oath.
On Wednesday, the Justice Department released more than 200 additional pages of e-mail messages and other documents and sent a letter to lawmakers saying that it had given Congress inaccurate information in an earlier letter that asserted that Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, had played no role in the removals.
See, they just forgot he was involved. They didn't lie to Congress. They "provided inaccurate information." It's an understandable mistake. It's not like Rove "exercises unusually broad influence."
Political advisers have had a hand in picking judges and prosecutors for decades, but Mr. Rove exercises unusually broad influence over political, policy and personnel decisions because of his closeness to the president, tenure in the administration and longstanding interest in turning the judiciary to the right.
Bring him in. Put him under oath.
(All these examples "came out" right before the hearings tomorrow where Sampson is to testify. This is an awful lot of specific detail for either a leak or emails. I would think that this is the White House trying to immunize before tomorrow. They may know what the Dems are bringing to the hearing.)
UPDATE: The AP has different euphemisms for lying. "erred in asserting," "certain statements... appeared to be contradicted by department documents included in our production."
We wouldn't know about any of this if the Dems had "taken their word."
Bring 'em in. Under oath.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home