Monday, June 25, 2012

What Prompted Karl Rove To Go Off On a Fact-Free Rant About Don Siegelman and Jill Simpson?

Greta Van Susteren and Karl Rove

No thinking American ever would take anything Karl Rove says as the truth. But the former Bush White House strategist issued a string of lies on Fox News the other night that was prodigious, even by his standards.

Greta Van Susteren initiated an interview that was supposed to be about the tax-exempt status of certain right-leaning PACs. For reasons that seemed to escape even Van Susteren, Rove took the question and turned it into a diatribe about the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. Much of Rove's vitriol was directed at Rainsville lawyer Jill Simpson, a former GOP operative who told Congress she was involved in a conference call about a plan to bring bogus charges against Siegelman, apparently with Rove's approval.

Van Susteren either was too timid or too stunned to point out to her audience that almost everything Rove said about Simpson, and her role in the Siegelman, case was false. (See the interview at the end of this post.) Andrew Kreig, of the D.C.-based Justice-Integrity Project, spells it out in a piece titled "Rove Repeatedly Lies On Fox News About Siegelman Case."

Here are a few whoppers from Rove's rant:

* He claimed Robert Bauer, counsel to President Barack Obama, represented Simpson in her appearance before Congress; it's a matter of public record that Bauer did not represent Simpson.

* He claimed Simpson's testimony was not under oath; it's a matter of public record that Simpson, in fact, did testify under oath.

* He claimed that Simpson has "disappeared"; in fact, Simpson has continued to practice law in Rainsville, and she currently is in Arizona training in civil disobedience.

Why would Rove get off on a Siegelman/Simpson tangent, one filled with misstatements? Kreig provides some important backdrop:

Rove's untruthfulness . . . seems far from irrational. He could land in trouble if subjected for the first time to a thorough investigation. His peace of mind on June 20, the day of his Fox interview, could not have been helped by a protest march that day by attendees of the annual Campaign For America's Future convention. They marched to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce offices to demand that federal authorities arrest Rove. The protest was symbolic, with no charges specified. 
In a similar vein, Rove critics active in the blogosphere have been claiming over the past week that one of Rove's colleagues is an ex-con who might be outed soon in a sex scandal. This is part of the ongoing back-and-forth war of nerves that political activists wage continually against one another, with lawsuits and claims of outrage by each side. Among the latter are GOP members of Congress seeking Justice Department prosecutions of liberal opponents. 
In this context, it made sense for Rove to deflect attacks by claiming to Fox listeners that he has been cleared from any suspicions by previous investigations and that critics are partisans allied unfairly against him.

One of Rove's colleagues is an ex-con who might be outed soon in a sex scandal? That information certainly jumps off the screen at you. But this question is of more immediate concern: Why has the Obama White House refused to endorse an investigation of apparent criminality in the George W. Bush administration, involving Rove and others? Kreig addresses several possible answers:

One is that Rove, with a long career of high-level contacts that include work for former CIA Director George H.W. Bush, might think he knows enough about one or more leaders in the Obama administration as to be protected against any unwanted disruption of his privacy. 
Under that scenario, Obama officials would have the incentive to keep coddling Rove and avoid any pre-election unpleasantness this year, as always, especially if there are national security factors far more important than the fate of prosecutorial abuse victims such as Siegelman and his family. 
That possibility of national security intrigue is not far-fetched given the unusual number of military-related factors that arose in the case. The anti-Siegelman prosecution team was headquartered at Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base, for example, with the lead prosecutor a colonel in the Air Force Reserve. The key interrogations of suspects were at the base, adding to a fear factor.

Is Karl Rove untouchable because he has dirt on higher ups in the Obama administration? That could be, but Kreig points out that it's also possible for Rove's rant to backfire on him. Sam Stein, of Huffington Post, reports that Bob Bauer fired off a letter demanding that Rove retract his false statements in the Van Susteren interview. In attacking Bauer, the president's counsel, is it possible that Rove poked the wrong bear with a stick, especially in an election year? Writes Kreig:

In sum, it's no secret that those running government both federally and locally like to keep secrets from the public. But one thing is for sure: Rove was lying on Fox News last week about whether Simpson had been working with Bauer. Oddly enough, however, Rove's nationally televised screed might prompt Bauer to urge his client pay attention, at long last, to one of the greatest scandals in recent American history.

Here is the Rove interview with Greta Van Susteren:


Anonymous said...

hes reaching for a lifeline, from the bush,obama bunch,he looked very worried, possibly as the final fall guy to keep the majority of the false history buried. and don will be free.,albiet with out recourse for compleate justice.P.S. a good read is Webster Tarply, ( 911,synthetic terror made in USA.,(A-V...

jeffrey spruill said...

When is somebody gonna arrest David W. Bouchard in the U.S. Attorneys firings?

I appeared in Chesapeake General District Court-Va.with Bouchard Friday-Dec.1,2006.

Notice the Dec.1,2006 date of the FBI Directors visit to the Norfolk Field Office:

FBI director: Agency more sensitive to rights

Published: December 1, 2006 in Local section, page B3

Story excerpt: NORFOLK

NORFOLK - The FBI has changed the way its agents deal with members of the Muslim and Arab American communities in light of criticisms that followed post-9/11 terrorism investigations, the agency's director said Thursday .
FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III spoke briefly with reporters at the agency's Norfolk field office after meeting with agents as part of a periodic visit.
Counterterrorism became the ...


Folks like Mr. Schnauzer knows what happened Thursday-Dec.7,2006 when 7 U.S. Attorneys were fired.

Robby Scott Hill said...

True dat, Anonymous. Rove will be hung out to dry like Lady Jane Grey. While King Edward VI lived, she was the most powerful woman in England. A week after his death, she was a convict, courtesy of my ancestor John Baker & Bloody Mary. When the power shifts, it shifts quickly. Woe unto the man who is on the wrong side of the shift :) Somebody always has to go down hard to make everyone else afraid to question the legitimacy of the new authority. If the Privy Council could shift against Grey, the secret US government can shift against Rove. All it takes is one old man with enough dirt & enough investments. A modern day John Baker is very much alive & at work within the halls of the West Wing.

legalschnauzer said...

Rove's appearance should dissolve any notions that he is brilliant, a "genius." If you are going to lie, at least tell lies that might be hard for your adversaries to catch. This stuff is easy to catch and refute. Makes "Bush's Brain" look pretty stupid and/or desperate.

Anonymous said...

or it could be a shadow gov. messaging code of reading between the lines(uncrackable) to voice there concerns from within.Hmmmm?? wasnt brightbart a bit over boisterous, and off the wall? yeh sounds crazy mabey, tarply"s book tells us to not dig to deep,

Anonymous said...

Few journalists bother to check the facts spouted by politicians. That is why they have free reign to lie with impunity and get away with it. The average American does not have the time nor resources to investigate what is being sold to the public as truth.....that is why an independent and unafraid press is so vital to our freedom. Unfortunately, the days of the dedicated reporter are fast slipping away.

Newspapers are not being read and are laying off staff. TV provides mere sound bites with little background or depth. So what is left? Perhaps, blogs such as Legal Schnauzer will fill the gap.....if only people will read them and head the messages.

jeffrey spruill said...

Maybe somebody should go & check your phone records for April of 2001 David W. Bouchard.

But I do believe you got off your cowardly lardy butt-Dave to use one more secure.

April 23, 2001: Bureau of Prisons terminated Chandra's six-month internship early because it was limited by regulations to 120 days following the completion of course work. She was told she would not be hired.

jeffrey spruill said...

Mr. Schnauzer:

I went back & looked at the Rove interview and he's clearly rattled.

Why would he talk such nonsense on national TV?

legalschnauzer said...

I don't know. He certainly seemed to take Greta Van Susteren by surprise.

ORAXX said...

Rove knows better than anyone, that the only thing that registers with most concervatives is........the noise level. In the sad little world of Karl Rove, absolutely anything goes, as long as Republicans win. The man should die in prison owing the country a hundred years.

Anonymous said...

fate' could be in the end, a inhumane bed fellow with good and evil, ie> to sacrifice the few for the many, or vice a versa? ..a sad choice and only acceptable in the magnitude of saving the world as a whole, rove a hero? to all/ (oil, jobs..population control,greenhouse affect rectified, just some brain synapses of mine.. (a.v

Andrew Kreig said...

Thanks for that fascinating historical reference. No wonder you see the grand sweep of history.
Andrew Kreig

jeffrey spruill said...

I will TOTALLY ENDORSE what Andrew just said.

jeffrey spruill

Anonymous said...

Ditto>: jeff@rob