What White House Staffers Make

Here is Rove's statement.

Rove's denial: "I have never communicated, either directly or indirectly, with Justice Department or Alabama officials about the investigation, indictment, potential prosecution, prosecution, conviction, or sentencing of Governor Siegelman, or about any other matter related to his case, nor have I asked any other individual to communicate about these matters on my behalf. I have never attempted, either directly or indirectly, to influence these matters."

But blogger emptywheel still sees a possible loophole. And indeed, Rove doesn't actually deny talking to people about Siegelman generally.

I always thought the Siegelman accusation was one of the most speculative against Rove. And I see this statement as one more attempt by him to avoid what he fears most: Being forced to answer direct questions, under oath, about his relations with the Justice Department.

Mukasey Watch

Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball write for Newsweek: "Raising the prospect that Guantánamo Bay inmates might be unleashed onto the streets of American cities, Attorney General Michael Mukasey said Wednesday there is an 'urgent' need for Congress to enact a new law governing how federal courts handle legal challenges from detainees at the U.S. prison camp in Cuba.

"But Mukasey's plea for quick passage of a significant new counterterrorism measure essentially fell on deaf ears--at least from the Democrats who control Congress. 'Zero,' snapped one key lawmaker, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, when asked the likelihood that Congress will rush to pass the kind of law Mukasey and the Bush administration are seeking. . . .

"The derisive comments from the feisty New York liberal--just moments after Mukasey issued his strong appeal in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee--underscores the huge and poisonous gulf that now exists between the White House and Congress on virtually every issue related to the War on Terror."

Lara Jakes Jordan writes for the Associated Press: "The House Judiciary Committee chairman on Wednesday said the Justice Department is stonewalling efforts to make sure this year's presidential voting operates fairly.

"Chairman John Conyers told Attorney General Michael Mukasey there hasn't been enough cooperation with Congress on voting rights issues. Conyers also said the work that has been done hasn't been effective.

"'As we sit here today, probably 100 days before the election, we don't know specifically how our government will respond to the problems that made the elections of 2000 and 2004 so problematic and so controversial,' Conyers told Mukasey at the start of the panel's oversight hearing -- likely the last House appearance for the attorney general.

"Conyers, D-Mich., said it's unclear whether voting machines will be fairly allocated and how federal election monitors will be deployed across the country."

Matthew Blake liveblogged the hearing for the Washington Independent. "Two hours into the House Judiciary Committee questioning Michael Mukasey and we're getting into the good stuff. Rep. Robert Wexler (D-Fl.) just asked Mukasey how he defines executive privilege. Mukasey says that executive privilege should be granted to a conversation a president has with closest advisers. How then, Wexler asked Mukasey, does Dick Cheney's interview with the FBI about the leaking of Valerie Plame Wilson's identity qualify as executive privilege?