House Panel OKs Subpoenas For Bush Aides

(CBS/AP)  A House panel on Wednesday approved subpoenas for President Bush's political adviser, Karl Rove and other top White House aides, setting up a potential constitutional showdown.

By voice vote, the House Judiciary subcommittee on commercial and administrative law decided to compel the president's top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings of eight federal prosecutors.

The White House has refused to budge in the controversy, standing by embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and insisting that the firings were appropriate.

CBS News chief White House correspondent Jim Axelrod reports that Gonzales will take to the road to fight for his job, spending the next week traveling the country to see as many U.S. attorneys as he can.

One source tells CBS News that Gonzales will apologize — not for the firings, but for the way he handled them.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said that in offering aides to talk to the committees privately, Mr. Bush had sought to avoid the "media spectacle" that would result from public hearings with Rove and others at the witness table.

"The question they've got to ask themselves is, are you more interested in a political spectacle than getting the truth?" Snow said of Tuesday's overture, which was relayed to Capitol Hill by White House counsel Fred Fielding.

Publicly, the White House held out hope there would be no impasse.

"The moment subpoenas are issued, it means they have rejected the offer," Snow said. But he added, "There's an important distinction between authorizing subpoenas and issuing them."

"There must be accountability," countered subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sanchez, D-Calif.

The Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a vote Thursday on its own set of subpoenas, with Democrats complaining that the threat of force is the only way to get a straight answer from the White House.

"The White House is in a bunker mentality — won't listen, won't change," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "I believe there is even more to come out, and I think it's our duty to bring it out."

The House subcommittee Wednesday approved, but has not issued, subpoenas for Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, their deputies and Kyle Sampson, Gonzales' chief of staff, who resigned over the uproar last week.

The panel also voted to compel the production of documents related to the firings from those officials and Gonzales, Fielding and White House chief of staff Joshua Bolton. Fielding a day earlier refused to provide Congress internal White House communications on the subject.

The full Judiciary Committee would authorize the subpoenas if Chairman John Conyers of Michigan chose to do so.

Authorizing the subpoenas "does provide this body the leverage needed to negotiate from a position of strength," said Rep. William Delahunt, D-Mass.

Republicans called the authorization premature, though some GOP members said they would consider voting to approve the subpoenas if Conyers promises to issue them only if he has evidence of wrongdoing.

Conyers agreed. "This (authority) will not be used in a way that will make you regret your vote."

Several Republicans said, "No" during the voice vote, but no roll call was taken.

For his part, Mr. Bush remained resolute.

Would he fight Democrats in court to protect his aides against congressional subpoenas?

"Absolutely," the president declared.

Mr. Bush said Tuesday he worried that allowing testimony under oath would set a precedent on the separation of powers that would harm the presidency as an institution.

A senior White House staff member told CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante the administration will not back down from the president's position, so there is no way Rove and other officials will testify.

• 1
• 2
• Next Page »

[teeus]

We have two options:
1- With America.
2-Against America.
I go with America. With my president.
Traitors,Liberals,Enemies,go with DEMONCRATS.
Posted by j02281 at 06:09 AM : Mar 22, 2007

Buddy! I got good news for you! There's another option! Really! Isn't that good news?!

I'm going to go with #1--going with America, but with a twist. I choose to hold my elected representatives accountable. I choose to pull those poor kids in Iraq from under the wheels of the bus this President has thrown them under. I choose to take advance level citizenship, and reasonably question events, rather than the entry level classes you seem to be stuck in and follow some dip stick down the rabbit hole.

I'm so glad I could be there for you, my bro. What a relief!

[baldfrog-2009]

To j02281
Get this and get this straight cause i can see your one of those shallow minded people who bought the fear package.They,whoever they are,could have flown planes into every building in this country and it does not justify lying to go to war or lying under oath.This is the National Paranoia Rove and Boys got his Boy elected with and really for all we know you may be one of his paid Boys postin on here.
I guess you didn't quite understand me earlier. Everyone who takes the Oath to serve their Country(Miltary,Congress,Senators,the Pres,The VP the Staff and Clerks, (by the way did you ever work in D.C.? )Page Boys the whole Govt.Now if you when you pledge your allegence and its just a superficial lie well we don't have to worry about what you would do under oath,We can just call it Roving under oath.But if I am going to fight for the principles,yes princples of this Country then I sure as hell do not want to put my life on the line for a bunch of lying azzholes like these.They are breaking the laws and rules the swore to uphold.Rove,Bush,Cheney, and the whole pathetic crew are laughing in our faces,spitting in our face and on those on those principles,and thousands have died because they have lied and broke the law and are tearing this Country apart.You'll have some whiny azz comeback I am sure so before you do I don't care if you do and you take it and shove it where the sun don't shine.Do you understand that!Your just jerking each other off on here anyway!

[antoniof123]

j02281 it does not matter how many posts you make that tactic went out with letters to the editor because we see it is you. Once is enough we can all read we just don't want to read the same thing over and over again. Please get a life or say something that is of importance.

[j02281]

We have two options:
1- With America.
2-Against America.
I go with America. With my president.
Traitors,Liberals,Enemies,go with DEMONCRATS.

[j02281]

The whole pathetic crew are laughing like you said,but only for people like you, with hate,
in your heart,looking for changes,changes to
destroy America,to sell America to our enemies.
I think,you forgot Sep/11/2001,you forgot they
attack us, innocent people died,americans died.
Do you really care about it.?. Or you only care
about how to sell our Country?.

[jerr11]

"The question they've got to ask themselves is, are you more interested in a political spectacle than getting the truth?"

White House spokesman Tony Snow


The question most Americans are asking is why this refusal to testify under oath, why the cover up?

A spectacle is when people testify without being under oath. It then becomes just another another opportunity for the Bush neocons to engage in more lying and spinning more untruths.

If you want the truth, let's get the truth.

Put Rove under oath.

Perhaps then we might get the truth from this lying White House.

[themartyred]

bush is NOT above the law, although he's been PERMITTED to fly above it with the previous republican congress and the scared media...

ENOUGH - he needs to answer for so many dirty tricks and direct lies!

[baldfrog-2009]

xgi123, wayfedup
I guess you didn't quite understand me earlier. So plain and simple as you well know everyone who takes the Oath to serve their Country(Miltary,Congress,Senators,the Pres,The VP the Staff and Clerks, (by the way did you ever work in D.C.? )Page Boys the whole crew.Now if you when you pledge your allegence its just a superficial lie well we don't have to worry about what you would do under oath,We can just call it Roving under oath.But if I am going to fight for the principles,yes princples of this Country then I sure as hell do not want to put my life on the line for a bunch of lying azzholes like these.They are breaking the laws and rules the swore to uphold.Rove,Bush,Cheney, and the whole pathetic crew are laughing in our faces,spitting in our face and on those on those principles,and thousands have died because they have lied and broke the law and are tearing this Country apart.You'll have some whiny azz comeback I am sure so before you do I don't care if you do and you take it and shove it where the sun don't shine.Do you understand that!Your just jerking each other off on here anyway!

[shingles1]

Supreme Court in U.S. V. Nixon:

Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets, we find it difficult to accept the argument that even the very important interest in confidentiality of Presidential communications is significantly diminished by production of such material for in camera inspection with all the protection that a district court will be obliged to provide.

MEANING that it is reserved for national security matters. Conservatives knew this and stressed this point repeatedly back during the Clinton era, but they seem to have conveniently forgotten this fact now.

[firststate]

When and how did executive privilege arise to protect white house staff from being required to respond to a congressional subpoena to testify under oath? It's a relatively recent development.