Rove Tried to Fire Fitzgerald During CIA Leak Investigation

In a supplement to his responses to the House Judiciary Committee, Patrick Fitzgerald confirms what we've always suspected: Karl Rove was trying to have Patrick Fitzgerald fired while Fitzgerald was still investigating Rove for his role in leaking Valerie Wilson's identity--and the timing lines up perfectly with the Administration's efforts to fire a bunch of US Attorneys.
Remember back in June, when Fitzgerald publicly suggested he had more details to share with Congress about Rove's efforts to get him fired?
"If I owe a response [about the putsch to remove him from his job], I owe it to Congress, first," Fitzgerald said when asked about all this after the verdict.
Well, it turns out Fitzgerald did share those details with Congress. And those details make it clear that Fitzgerald learned Rove was trying to fire him while Fitzgerald was still actively investigating Rove's role in the leak of Valerie Wilson's identity. >>>cont

LinkHere

Expert: Rove executive privilege claim won't stand up in court

David Edwards and Nick JulianoPublished: Thursday July 17, 2008

NYU professor says Bush power claims 'wider than Nixon'
In the waning days of George W. Bush's presidency, it seems that every week brings a new showdown with Congress over the president's refusal to let his aides testify in the investigation of the US Attorney firing scandal.
MSNBC host Dan Abrams discussed the latest subpoena showdowns involving former Bush aide Karl Rove and Attorney General Michael Mukasey Wednesday night. Rove ignored a subpoena to testify a a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, and Mukasey is refusing an Oversight Committee subpoena to hand over transcripts of the FBI's interview with Vice President Dick Cheney during its Valerie Plame investigation. So far neither committee has voted to hold the officials in contempt of Congress.
New York University law professor Michael Waldman told Abrams Congress' threats were becoming "hard to believe" and he worried about the extent to which Congress was willing to recognize Bush's claims of executive privilege. Abrams qualified the restrictions as "no one is allowed to testify if they work for the president."
"It's much wider than previous administrations have claimed, even than Nixon claimed," Waldman said. "And the fact of the matter is I think something like that will not stand up in court."
"If I was the president I wouldn't be too worried about this Congress either," Abrams scoffed. "The fact that they have taken no action against Karl Rove -- almost a week after he refused to even show up to assert his privilege -- sure makes it seem like they're willing to take it on the chin and avoid taking any action to enforce these subpoenas."
This video is from MSNBC's Verdict, broadcast July 16, 2008.