Where's Karl Rove?

"Back in November, 2005, when the re-authorization of the Patriot Act was being 'debated,' the abuse by the FBI of these NSLs was documented in an excellent expose by The Washington Post's Barton Gellman."

Greenwald concludes: "One of the very few attempts over the last six years from Congress to impose at least some safeguards on the use of radical new executive powers was to require that the FBI report to Congress on the issuance of NSLs, so that Congress could at least know about (and, theoretically, take action in response to) any abuse of these powers. But the minute George Bush got what he wanted -- re-authorization of the Patriot Act -- he proclaimed for all the world to hear that he had the power to violate those provisions and refuse to comply with such safeguards. And now it is revealed that the FBI has, in fact, violated the very provisions which the President proclaimed he could violate."

Could this be the "smoking gun" for Bush's controversial signing statements?

Up until now, it's not been at all clear whether Bush's unprecedented use of signing statements represented just a lot of ideological bluster -- or an actual intent to violate duly enacted laws.

Valerie Plame Watch

Reuters reports: "Valerie Plame, the former covert CIA agent whose cover was blown after her husband accused the White House of manipulating prewar intelligence, will testify before a congressional committee next week, the committee chairman said Thursday.

"Plame will testify about the disclosure and how the White House handled it in an appearance before the House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform, Chairman Henry Waxman said in a statement.

"Waxman, a California Democrat, also sent a letter to the special prosecutor in the CIA leak investigation ... asking for a meeting to discuss the possibility of Fitzgerald testifying before the House committee."

From the letter: "By necessity, your investigation had a narrow legal focus: Were any federal criminal statutes violated by White House officials? Your investigation, however, has raised broader questions of national significance. I am writing to invite you to meet to discuss how the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which is the principal oversight committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, can become informed of your views about these broader issues. ...

"[T]he trial proceedings raise questions about whether senior White House officials, including the Vice President and Senior Advisor to the President Karl Rove, complied with the requirements governing the handling of classified information. They also raise questions about whether the White House took appropriate remedial action following the leak. . . . Your perspective on these matters is important.

"After the verdict was announced yesterday, one juror expressed the view that former Chief of Staff to the Vice President Lewis 'Scooter' Libby was only a 'fall guy.' This juror's views encapsulated questions that many in Congress and the public have about whether the ultimate responsibility for the outing of Ms. Wilson rests with more senior officials in the White House. This is another area where you have a unique perspective."

Scooter Libby Opinion Watch

E.J. Dionne Jr. writes in his Washington Post opinion column that "the evidence of recent days should settle the case: This administration has operated on the basis of a hyperpartisanship not seen in decades. Worse, the destroy-the-opposition, our-team-vs.-their-team approach has infected large parts of the conservative movement and the Republican Party. That's a shame, since there are plenty of good people in both. Still, the tendency to subordinate principles to win short-term victories and cover up for the administration is, alas, rampant on the right.

"Take the rush of conservative organs demanding an immediate pardon of Scooter Libby after his conviction on four counts related to lying and obstruction of justice. . . .