| Page 2 of 3 < > |
Karl Rove: New Rampart, Old Battles
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
One thing that may be more difficult for Rove is recovering his reputation as a master political strategist: While friends and admirers argue that Rove has received a bad rap for President Bush's political troubles, others in the party, especially on Capitol Hill, are pointing their fingers at Rove.
"Republicans say Rove is the architect," said one GOP insider on the Hill. "He's the architect of our demise."
Privilege Dispute Moves to Court
Another chapter of the feuding between the White House and the Democrats in Congress will unfold today, as the so-far-unsuccessful House Democratic effort to get White House chief of staff Joshua B. Bolten and former counsel Harriet E. Miers to testify on the U.S. attorney firings is moving to the federal courthouse.
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates will hear arguments from lawyers for the House and for the Justice Department in the dispute over whether the two officials can be forced to testify before the Judiciary Committee.
At issue is the scope of executive privilege, the proposition that the president can resist providing certain information to Congress or the courts on the theory that he would otherwise not receive candid advice from his senior advisers.
In court papers in the case, the Justice Department argues that the president's senior advisers are immune from being compelled to testify before Congress. The president, agency lawyers contend, is "constitutionally entitled to autonomy and confidentiality in the performance of his 'responsibilities' and his 'office.' . . . That autonomy, it is clear, must be safeguarded from intrusion by the other Branches."
Lawyers for the Judiciary Committee question that claim, saying the White House has only a "generalized interest" in confidentiality. They argue that the need for testimony from Bolten and Miers outweighs the president's claim of privilege.
The case is being closely watched by students of the presidency, in large measure because such disputes are usually settled before they get to court. But Bush has been fierce in his defense of his powers, and so this case could have broad ramifications.
It also likely won't be settled anytime soon. Bates's opinion "is just going to be the first step, then it will be the Court of Appeals and then maybe even the Supreme Court," American University law professor Daniel Marcus tells my colleague Del Quentin Wilber.
A Promising Relationship Falters
The White House made little secret of its delight with the election late last year of Lee Myung-bak as president of South Korea after tense relations with his predecessor Roh Moo- hyun.
Lee made clear his desire to improve relations with Washington, get tough with North Korea and reach agreement on a new free trade deal. He was rewarded with a visit to Camp David in April, when Lee said Bush would be returning to South Korea later this year.
But oh what a difference two months make: Lee's decision to allow the importation of U.S. beef, coupled with a general feeling that he has been too accommodating of the Bush administration, has helped send his approval ratings plummeting and provoked protests in Seoul. Last week, Lee fired eight of his top aides and publicly apologized for failing to grasp his people's fears about mad cow disease.


