Karl Rove

[mpok1519]

its difficult to find covered up evidence. ~nod~

 

[MachZer0]

Err...according to the Supreme Courts in many decisions you are in error. Congress does have power to impeach and remove those of the executive branch, and in order to have that ability, they need to know what is or isn't going on so therefore they do have the power of investigation.

Here's the lastest:

"McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 177 (1927)."

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with impeachment. If they want to impeach Bush, they can draw up articles of impeachment like the House did with Clinton and Johnson

 

[MachZer0]

its difficult to find covered up evidence. ~nod~

It's even harder to find evidence that doesn't exist. you've demonstrated that here in several posts

 

[JoyJuice]

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with impeachment. If they want to impeach Bush, they can draw up articles of impeachment like the House did with Clinton and Johnson

The executive branch is more than Bush. It also consists of what ever the heck the tax paid capacity Rove was as a member of the executive branch.

Still can't figure that out.

Moreover some of Clinton's acts faced congressional hearings.

 

[JoyJuice]

Because they're every bit as corrupt as Rove.

You mean the department that was taking marching order from Rove himself, and whose new AG has declared that "just because one violates the law, it doesn't make it a crime." The one who thinks that negative publicity is enough of a punishment when one has violated not only Department policy, but Federal law.

....oops, I forgot, violating Federal law is not always a crime.

these guys are pathetic and I can't wait for the day Justice Department officials once again have pride in their department.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with impeachment. If they want to impeach Bush, they can draw up articles of impeachment like the House did with Clinton and Johnson

The investigation is necessary for that -- besides, who said anything about impeaching Bush? The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach "All civil officers" in the government -- including Rove.

 

[MachZer0]

The investigation is necessary for that -- besides, who said anything about impeaching Bush? The Constitution gives Congress the authority to impeach "All civil officers" in the government -- including Rove.

Again, you are calling for an investigation into a legal act. And in case you haven't noticed it, Rove is not a civil officer.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Again, you are calling for an investigation into a legal act.

Was it really legal?

And in case you haven't noticed it, Rove is not a civil officer.

Actually, he was -- insofar that he was in the service -- and on the payroll -- of one.

If that doesn't apply, then Rove have no right to claim Executive Privilige.

 

[MachZer0]

Was it really legal?

Yes it was and note that no evidence of any wrongdoing has been produced

Actually, he was -- insofar that he was in the service -- and on the payroll -- of one.

If that doesn't apply, then Rove have no right to claim Executive Privilige.

I'd be interested to find out if a politcal advisor could be impeached. Somehow I doubt it

 

[Nathan Poe]

Yes it was and note that no evidence of any wrongdoing has been produced

Note that Rove is stonewalling the very investigation that is searching for that evidence.

Obstruction of Justice, contempt of Congress... these are crimes even when a NeoCon stooge commits them.

I'd be interested to find out if a politcal advisor could be impeached. Somehow I doubt it

Somehow I thought you would -- Still fuming that they didn't put the Clintons in front of a firing squad?

 

[MachZer0]

Was it really legal?



Actually, he was -- insofar that he was in the service -- and on the payroll -- of one.

If that doesn't apply, then Rove have no right to claim Executive Privilige.

Here's an explanation of who is meant by civil officer

Q. Who are these officials?
A. Article 2, Section 4, specifies that "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." These "civil officers" include federal judges and cabinet members, but do not include Senators and Representatives, (the Senate and House deal with misconduct by their own members).

Under that definition, he was not a civil officer

 

[Nathan Poe]

Here's an explanation of who is meant by civil officer

Under that definition, he was not a civil officer

Actually, Mach, it says absolutely nothing about Rove's status. How do you figure it rules him out?

 

[MachZer0]

Actually, Mach, it says absolutely nothing about Rove's status. How do you figure it rules him out?

Here's what it says

These "civil officers" include federal judges and cabinet members,

Rove was neither. Rove was an advisor and as an advisor I don't see how he could be impeached. He was neither elected nor appointed such as the cabinet members.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Here's what it saysRove was neither. Rove was an advisor and as an advisor I don't see how he could be impeached. He was neither elected nor appointed such as the cabinet members.

Ah, so you're assuming that the list was complete?

 

[MachZer0]

Ah, so you're assuming that the list was complete?

No, but I also see no valid reason to consider Rove a civil officer.

 

[mpok1519]

if he has nothing to hide he'd testify.

 

[MachZer0]

if he has nothing to hide he'd testify.

Sorry, but Rove has a duty to protect the integrity of the separation of powers, the checks and balances

 

[reverend B]

No, but I also see no valid reason to consider Rove a civil officer.

that's not an argument, mach. "the list is not all inclusive, but i have decided to exclude this guy." not much weight in that logic.

 

[MachZer0]

that's not an argument, mach. "the list is not all inclusive, but i have decided to exclude this guy." not much weight in that logic.

Yet there's been nothing significant to demonstrate that he would be a civil officer. He's an advisor, neither elected nor appointed.

 

[mpok1519]

protecting sep of powers?

dont you mean protecting his own butt from due process? lol