Karl Rove Ignores Congressional Subpoena

Isn't it illegal to refuse a subpoena?  

Former White House adviser Karl Rove ignored a Congressional subpoena and didn't show up in court to testify on Thursday, over allegations that he influenced the prosecution of a former Democratic Governor of Alabama, Don Siegelman. 

Allegedly, there's proof that Rove and other GOP operatives, fired 9 federal prosecutors for political reasons. 

When a person is subpoenaed you usually have to cooperate with the law, and if you don't jail time could be right around the corner. 

So should Karl Rove be brought up on incriminating charges?

The White House expressed executive privilege as a block to the subpoena for Karl Rove and other GOP officials within the Bush administration. Apparently, the White House believes that internal administration communications are confidential, and that congress shouldn't make officials testify.

So Karl Rove will never testify because of his protection from the Bush administration? 

Yes, it appears to look that way and although Rove agreed to talk about specifics regarding the Siegelman case, he refused to have a transcriber record the conversation and denounced speaking under oath. So doesn't that tell us right there that he's guilty? The number one rule in court is to not lie under oath and if he refuses to speak under oath, might as well not speak at all, right? Wrong! Always get both sides to have something to compare it to later on if need be.

How is it that government makes laws but refuses to obey them if it doesn't benefit ones own need?

No one should be above the law, right? I absolutely do not agree with the Bush administration that executive privilege, should protect officials from telling the truth. Needless to say Democrats refused Roves' offer to speak with them off the record.

2008 LA