David Iglesias, Karl Rove, and the Fired U.S. Attorneys
Karl Rove, the political guru who gave us George W. Bush, is out of the White House now and free to circulate his opinions in a Newsweek column, on Fox TV, and in newspaper op-eds. But he refuses to talk to Congress about his role of firing eight U.S. attorneys after the 2006 elections.
Rove's attorney Robert Luskin says he will not appear to testify on the grounds of executive privilege. If the claim is made, contempt of Congress should be voted against him and let the current Justice Department stew or the courts decide it. With his silence, Rove is just confirming that he played a central role in the firings and probably feels he is safe with the still Republican-held Justice Department.
Republicans who challenge these words should read the question-answer interview with Republican David Iglesias, the former U.S. attorney in Albuquerque, N.M., who was fired by the Justice Department by then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Gonzales has left Justice, with a soiled record as his legacy.
According to the interview, published in the New York Times Sunday magazine of May 25, Iglesias was improperly telephoned by New Mexico Republican Sen. Pete Domenici. He was inquiring about information gathered against the Democratic opponent of Republican Rep. Heather Wilson, who eventually won that election and is now seeking Domenici's seat in the Senate. (Domenici is retiring.)
No charges were filed by Iglesias in the matter and that led to his downfall.
Iglesias says that it is his understanding that Rove is an agnostic. That comes as a shocker since Rove was the one who mobilized right wing evangelical Christians for Bush and fellow Republicans in the 2000 election and since.
Iglesias says he is now a "disillusioned Republican." He is Hispanic and an evangelical Christian, two pillars of the current GOP party of Karl Rove-ism.
In recent years, many in politics and the media have lamented the loss of civility in Washington.
You can pin some of that blame on Karl Rove, who continues to be a figure in this messy case.
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (8) | Print
Reader Comments
Looks like Bush was right about Acorn
The facts are in, so let's hear the arguments now.
Rove Is an agnostic
How does that subject bear relevance to a challenge of complicity in the firings???
What a poor excuse for a news piece.
Easy
If you want the truth, just invert everything that this administration has been telling us:
They have weapons of mass destruction = They have no weapons of mass destruction
We don't torture = Yeah, we torture
There's no truth to the 9-11 conspiracies = ???
advertisement
John W. Mashek covered politics in Washington for four decades with U.S. News & World Report, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and the Boston Globe. His primary beats were Congress, the White House, and national politics. He covered every presidential election from 1960 to 1996. He was a panelist in three televised presidential debates in 1984, 1988, and 1992.