At a certain level, it was hardly a mystery who was helping pull the strings on the [tag]prosecutor[/tag] [tag]purge[/tag]. Last fall, stripped of his policy responsibilities, [tag]Karl Rove[/tag] was focused exclusively on improving Republicans’ chances in the midterm elections. So, when we learn that U.S. Attorneys have been fired for maintaining the integrity of their offices, and we know the White House was at least tacitly involved, it doesn’t take too big a leap to connect the dots.
Yesterday, the big story was news that Rove and at least one other member of the White House political team were urged by the New Mexico Republican party chairman to fire the state’s U.S. attorney, [tag]David Iglesias[/tag], because Iglesias neglected to indict Democrats in a voter fraud investigation shortly before the election. Today, there’s some important follow-up.
The [tag]White House[/tag] acknowledged on Sunday that presidential adviser Karl [tag]Rove[/tag] served as a conduit for complaints to the Justice Department about federal prosecutors who were later fired for what critics charge were partisan political reasons.
House investigators on Sunday declared their intention to question Rove about any role he may have played in the firings.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Rove had relayed complaints from Republican officials and others to the Justice Department and the White House counsel’s office. She said Rove, the chief White House political operative, specifically recalled passing along complaints about former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and may have mentioned the grumblings about Iglesias to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Iglesias says he believes he lost his job as the top federal prosecutor in New Mexico after rebuffing Republican pressure to speed his investigation of a Democratic state official.
Perino said Rove might have mentioned the complaints about Iglesias “in passing” to Gonzales.
“He doesn’t exactly recall, but he may have had a casual conversation with the A.G. to say he had passed those complaints to Harriet Miers,” Perino said, relaying Rove’s hazy recollection.
There’s that fuzzy-memory defense again. The Bush White House sure is forgetful when it comes to legally dubious dirty tricks, isn’t it?
Here’s another key tidbit from the McClatchy article:
Among the complaints that Rove relayed were concerns among Republican Party officials in various jurisdictions that the Justice Department was not being aggressive in pursuing allegations of election fraud by Democrats. Such allegations by Republicans were a particular concern in New Mexico and Washington.
The political director of the White House was having casual chats with top Justice Department officials, including the attorney general, about which federal prosecutors weren’t doing enough to politicize their offices. Soon after, those prosecutors were fired in an unprecedented purge. Why would anyone find this suspicious?
And did I mention that one of the purged U.S. Attorneys was fired so that a Rove acolyte could get the job?
One last thought. From the McClatchy article:
Perino said Rove told her that he did not suggest any of the eight U.S. attorneys be forced to resign.
Yes, and Rove and Libby told McClellan that they were not involved with leaking Valerie Plame’s name. Isn’t it safe to say that what Rove tells White House spokespeople to pass along to reporters isn’t exactly reliable anymore?
Bring on the hearings.